Press Copies

The identity of the handwriting as shown on the impression is tics. A person having accurate knowledge or benefice, chapel, prebend, or priory. It is can testify to the genuineness with as much not subject to the ordinary; but of it the accuracy as if the original sheets were be- patron, and those who have a right from fore him. Such copies are the same as other him, are the collators. Whart. L(iw Lex. writings partially obliterated by damp and PRESUME. To believe or accept upon exposure, which are admissible as evidence, probable evidence. It is not so strong a if duly identified by testimony. They are word as infer; Morford v. Peck, 46 Conn. not however satisfactory as standards of 385. See Inference; Presumption. comparison of handwriting. Enough originality is left to be identified by a witness PRESUMPTION. An inference affirmative when its own originality is in question; or disaflirmative of the truth or falsehood Com. v. Eastman, 1 Cush. (Mass.) 217, 48 of any proposition or fact drawn by a pro- Am. Dec. 596; to prove the contents of a lost cess of probable reasoning in the absence of letter, or where a party refused to give up actual certainty of its < truth or falsehood, or the original; Dennis v. Barber, 6 S. & R. until such certainty can be ascertained. (Pa.) 420; Cameron v. Peck, 37 Conn. 555. Best, Presump. 4. The necessity of producing the original, or An inference affirmative or disaffirmalaying the foundation in the usual way for tive of the existence of a disputed fact, secondary evidence, is not obviated by the drawn by a judicial tribunal, by a process fact that a party keeps letter press copies; of probable reasoning, from some one or Foot v. Bentley, 44 N. Y. 171, 4 Am. Rep. more matters of fact, either admitted in 652; Marsh v. Hand, 35 Md. 123. A copy, the cause or otherwise satisfactorily estabsworn to be correctly made from a press lished. Best, Presump. 12. copy of a letter, is admissible as secondary A rule of law that courts and judges evidence, to prove its contents, without pro- shall draw a particular inference from a ducing the press copy; Goodrich v. Weston, particular fact, or from particular evidence, 102 Mass. 362, 3 Am. Rep. 469. Press copies unless and until the truth of such inference are admissible against a party when they is disproved. Steph. Ev. 4; Ulrich v. Ulrich, appear to be in his handwriting and the orig- 136 N. Y. 120, 32 N. E. 606, IS L. R. A. 37. inals cannot be produced; Com. v. Jefferies, Conclusive presumptions are inferences 7 Allen (Mass.) 561, 83 Am. Dec. 712. Strict- which the law makes so peremptorily that ly speaking, a letter-press copy is secondary it will not allow them to he overturned by to the document from which it is taken, and any contrary proof, however strong. Best, cannot be treated as an original; 3 Camp. Presump. 20. They are called, also, abso- 228; Marsh v. Hand, 35 Md. 123; Merritt v. lute and irrebuttable presumptions. Wright, 19 La. Ann. 91; Anglo-American Disputable presumptions are inferences of Packing & P. Co. v. Cannon, 31 Fed. 313. law which hold good until they are inval- Press copies, duly proved and attached to idated by proof or a stronger presumption a deposition, are admissible where timely no- Best, Presump. 29; Livingston v. Livingston, tice was given defendant to produce origi- 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 287, 8 Am. Dec. 562. nals at the trial, and they w r ere not produc- Presumptions of fact are inferences as to ed; notice need not be given when deposi- the existence of some fact drawn from the existence of some other fact; inferences tions are taken; Illinois Car & E. Co. v. Wagon Co., 112 Fed. 737, 50 C. C. A. 504. which common sense draws from circumstances usually occurring in such cases. 3