
    Lynch against M‘Hugo.
    Entries made in the front leaf of a tradesman’s books before the first page» and not in the regular course of charges, have a suspicious appearance, and therefore not proper to go to a jury. But the púmíiif may rely on other ieMi* mony, if lie thinks proper.
    ASSUMPSIT for board and lodging, &c. The original entry in the plaintiff’s books was called for; when it appeared that no entry of the charge or account was made at the time the defendant lodged in the house of the plaintiff ; excepting a post entry, some considerable time after-wards, not written in the leaves of the book where other charges were usually made, but on a leaf before the first page of the book. It appeared also, that the parties had been friends, and had lived amicably together for some time. There had, however, been a difference between them, and it was suggested, that these post entries were made after this difference had taken place ; and from an inspection of the book, it had every appearance of it.
    The counsel for the defendant objected to this evidence-going to the jury, because the entries ai'e evidently out of the usual course of business, and not made in the regular order in which the transactions occurred ; and urged, that it would be a very dangerous thing to allow such kind of entries, made, perhaps, years after the occurrences had happened, to be good, in a court of justice, to charge aman, or his estate after his death.
    
      In reply, it was said, that it was immaterial in what part of a book the original entries were made, whether in the first or last page of the book. The act of assembly, allowing merchants’ and shop-keepers’ books to be good evidence, was silent on the subject; and if such entries were fairly made, it was all that the act required. As to the time when these entries ought to be made, it was also silent. It would be a hard case, indeed, if a man should be deprived of a just debt or demand, because it was not entered exactly on the hour or day that it accrued.
   Per Curiam.

The admission of merchants’, shop-keepers’, and tradesmen’s books, and the oath of the parties themselves, to prove the entries, are deviations from the strict principles of the common law, and only allowed in favour of mercantile and regular transactions, under an express act of the legislature. It is, therefore, the duty of the court, to see, that nothing but what is fair and regular should go to the jury; and wherever there is any departure from the usual and established rules of business, to require other proof than such entries. In the present case, these entries are out of the usual course, and by no means regular. They have, at least, a suspicious appearance, and ought not to be permitted to go to a jury. The plaintiff, however, may rely on other evidence in support of his account, if he pleases.

Nonsuit suffered.

Present, Heyward and Grimke, Justices. 
      
       In the case of Cook and Thompson, tried before Pendleton, J. a new book of entries was rejected, because it bad the appearance of being; fabricated ft" the purpose.
     