
    *Lamb v. Stewart.
    Peclarations made by a witness previous to his examination, contrary to his statements when examined, is admissible to discredit his testimony.
    This case came before Judges Pease and Burnet, on a writ of error, at the August Term, 1826, in the county of Ashtabula.
    
      It appeared from the record, that the plaintiff in the trial before the common pleas, called a witness, who testified to certain items in his account against the defendant. The defendant then offered to prove that the same witness, on a former occasion, when conversing on the same 'subject, not being under oath, had made different statements. The testimony offered, was objected to and overruled, and a bill of exceptions taken.
    The case was submitted without argument.
   By the Court :

The testimony offered by the defendant was strictly legal. He had a right to discredit the witness, who had been examined against him, and one method of effecting that object was, by proving that he had told different stories, at different times, when conversing on the same subject. Such evidence is always admitted when offered, and the effect of it is left to the jury.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded. 
      
       NoTE by the Editor. — Contradictory statements on oath neutralize each other, and are disregarded entirely, vii. 88, part 2; xvi. 338.
     