1789.
ginia, is not fuch good evidence as a fworn copy, compared with the rolls, or an exemplification under the Great Seal ; but thefe modes of authentication are , likewife, inferior to the original law itfelf. If the Plaintiff in Error had been fued in Virginia, this printed book of the acts of Affembly would there, unqueftionably, have been good evidence ; and I can difcern no fatisfactory reafon, why, as he is fued here, the fame evidence fhould not be received, at leaft prima ƒacie ; for, although it were a forgery, and the proof in that refpect, could not on a fudden, during the fhort period of a trial, be produced; yet, in cafe of any reafonable fufpicion, the Court might referve to the point, and give the party leave upon eftablifhing the fact, to move for a new trial.
Lord Chief Juftice Willes fays, in the cafe of Omichund v. Barker, 1 Atk. 21. that “ the rules of evidence are to be confidered, as poffitive artificial rules, framed by men for their convenience in refpect to the tranfaction of bufinefs in the Courts of Juftice;” but there has been no rule eftablifhed, as far as my knowledge extends, concerning the evidence now under confideration. It has been a rule in the Courts of Great-Britain, “ to allow fuch proof as they beyond the fea will allow.” This, however, muft be fubject to reftrictions: And, although the general principle and rule of evidence is, “ that the beft evidence the nature of the thing will admit, fhall be given,” yet, by conftant practice and allowance of the Judges, this rule is frequently difpenfed with. Were it not, indeed, for this, controverfies in Courts of Juftice would be entangled with too many difficulties , and attended with too great trouble and expence, to permit men to feek for redrefs of many wrongs in a legal way. The fame reafon, that would induce this Court to require a law of Virginia to be proved as any other fact, muft induce them to infift upon the like proof of the Laws of every other State, kingdom, or empire, however remote ; a pofition pregnant with intolerable inconvenience; deftructive to trade, commerce, and credit ; and, in feveral cafes, fatal to juftice.
Though the practice of the Courts, or forms of pleadings, which pafs ʃub ʃilentio, do not make the law ; yet, in a cafe like the prefent, a conftant practice of permitting acts of Affembly, or laws to be read out of printed books, without oppofition, is a great evidence of the law ; and fuch printed copies, being of public notoriety, and relied on as genuine, have the prefumption of authenticity, in their favor, and afford a reafonable fatisfaction to the mind of their truth and accuracy.
Upon the whole, therefore, I am of opinion, that the Court below erred in the rejection of the evidence in queftion ; and that for the caufe only, the judgment ought to be reverfed.
With refpect to the errors alledged againft the ʃecond record, they have all, except one, been confidered and difallowed, in the courfe of the preceding obfervations. The one that remains to be decided is, that the Court below, on motion of the Counfel
for
