
    Henry Earle vs. Samuel Sawyer.
    the plaintiff, having made a verbal special contract with the defendant to erect stairs for him, and having employed his hired workmen for the purpose, who performed labor thereon at various times for a year or more; it was held, that the stairs so erected were not a proper subject of book-account, as a single item of charge, made at the time when they were finished and put up.
    This was an action of assumpsit to recover for the following item of account: — “ May 26, 1848. Samuel Sawyer, Dr to Henry Earle. To stairs, $57.”
    At the trial before Mellen, J., in the court of common pleas, the plaintiff offered in evidence, as a book of original entries, a memorandum-book, containing the above item, which was entered therein for the purpose of being charged to the defendant.
    The plaintiff, on his cross-examination, stated, that the stairs were made at various times for a year before the charge was made; and in answer to the question, whether the charge was made at or about the time when the services were rendered, that some of the work was done more than a year before, but that the charge was made on the book at the time when the stairs were finished and put up. He also stated, that the work was done and put up by his hired workmen, and that the work was done under a verbal special contract.
    The defendant objected to the admission of the book as evidence, for the reasons, that the charge relied on was too general; that the work was done under a verbal special contract; that the charge was of such a nature as to show, that better evidence could be produced; and that it was not made at the time when the services were performed and the materials furnished.
    But the presiding judge overruled the objection and admitted the book as evidence ; whereupon the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant alleged exceptions.
    
      H. D. Stone, for the defendant, was not called on.
    
      E. Fuller, for the plaintiff.
   By the Court.

The book was not competent evidence, and should not have been admitted.

Verdict set aside and new trial ordered.  