JAMES SHAW WILLES AND HENRY SINGER KEATING, OF THE INNER TEMPLE, ESQUIRES, BARRISTERS-AT-LAW (AFTERWARDS JUDGES OF HER MAJESTY'S THE FIFTH AND SIXTH EDITIONS BY FRED. PHILIP MAUDE AND THOS. EDWARD CHITTY, OF THE INNER TEMPLE, ESQUIRES, BARRISTERS-AT-LAW. THE SEVENTH AND EIGHTH EDITIONS AND THE NINTH EDITION BY RICHARD HENN COLLINS, M.A., FELLOW OF DOWNING COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, ESQUIRE, AND ROBERT GEORGE ARBUTHNOT, M.A., LATE SCHOLAR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, OF THE INNER TEMPLE, ESQUIRE, NINTH AMERICAN, FROM THE NINTH ENGLISH EDITION, WITH ELABORATE AMERICAN NOTES TO DATE BY THE DISTINGUISHED AUTHORS NAMED "It is ever good to rely upon the book at large; for many times, Compendia sunt IN THREE VOLUMES.-VOL. III. BOSTON: CHARLES H. EDSON & CO., PUBLISHERS. 1889. HIGHAM v. RIDGWAY. TRINITY, 48 GEO. 3.-IN THE KING'S BENCH. [REPORTED 10 EAST, 109.] If a person have peculiar means of knowing a fact, and make a written entry of that fact, which is against his interest at the time, it is evidence of the fact as between third persons after his death. And therefore an entry made by a man-midwife who had delivered a woman of a child of his having done so on a certain day, referring to his ledger, in which he had made a charge for his attendance, which was marked as paid, is evidence upon an issue as to the age of such child at the time of his afterwards suffering a recovery. UPON error brought to reverse a recovery suffered by Wm. Fowden, the younger, of certain lands in the county palatine of Chester, of which he claimed to be first tenant in tail under indentures of the 16th and 17th of December, 1763, it appeared that the premises were limited in remainder to the first son of the body of Wm. Fowden the father, in tail, with remainder to the second and other sons in tail, remainder to the daughters in tail; under which last limitation the plaintiff Elizabeth claimed, in default of heirs male of Wm. Fowden the father, as heir of the body of Mary, his only daughter. The record set forth the recovery, which was of the session at Chester on the 16th of April, 29 G. 3, and appeared to have been acknowledged at Macclesfield on the 15th of April, 1789, and that an affidavit was sworn on that day by Wm. Morley, Wm. Fowden, sen., and Mary, the wife of John Orme, in which Wm. Fowden, sen., swore "that Wm. Fowden the younger was born on the second of April, 1768, but that, being a Protestant Dissenter, no entry was made of his baptism in any register." And Mary Orme swore that she was aunt to Wm. Fowden, jun., and well remembered that he was born in the beginning of April, and before the 15th day of that month, in the year 1768." And the error assigned was, that it appeared in the record, &c., that Wm. Fowden, jun., on Friday, in the aforesaid session at Chester, appeared by attorney and warranted the tenements, &c., to E. (the tenant), &c.; but that Wm: Fowden, jun., was then an infant within the age of twenty-one years, viz., twenty years and no more. And on joinder in error, the issue was, "Whether Wm. Fowden the younger, at the time of his appearance and warranty, and voucher to warranty, and also at the time of the giving of the said judgment (of recovery), was an infant within the age of twenty-one years, to wit, of the age of twenty years and no more." At the trial at Chester it appeared that Wm. Fowden, jun., died on the 31st of December, 1792, having before made his will, and Wm. Fowden, sen., the father, died on the 20th of March, 1806; but Mary Orme, the aunt, was still living, and examined as a witness by the defendant in support of the fact as sworn to in her affidavit; but the accuracy of her recollection as to the precise day of her nephew's birth was rendered doubtful by circumstances which came out upon cross-examination. And on the part of the plaintiffs, it was, amongst other things, proved by a neighbor that Wm. Fowden the father, and his wife, lived at Bramhall, where William the son was born; that it was on a Friday. That he was desired by the father to fetch Mr. Hewitt, the man-midwife, who lived at Stockport, about three miles and a half distant: the witness, however, had occasion to go elsewhere, and another person was sent to Mr. Hewitt, and on the witness's return the same evening, Mrs. Fowden was brought to bed of a son. That the wife of Richard Fallows, who lived half a mile off, was also delivered on the same day. The person who was sent to Mr. Hewitt's corroborated this account, and knew young Fallows and young Fowden, as they grew up, who appeared about the same age. Another witness also proved the birth of young Fowden on a Friday (the particular day of the week was oved by reference to market day and other collateral circum |