
    SHUTE against OGDEN.
    ON CERTIOEAKI.
    The evidence of the demand of the plaintiff below, Ogden, was his books of account. It appeared that the justice admitted in evidence, the books of account of the plaintiff, on a witness swearing that he never saw the plaintiff’s books before the time of the trial ; but that the books were in the hand writing of the plaintiff, and that in the waste book of the plaintiff, he perceived an entry of a transaction performed by the plaintiff as broker for the witness, which the witness had settled. On this evidence, the justice examined the plaintiff’s books, and rendered judgment in his favor.
    
      Colonel Ogden, for the defendant below,
    the plaintiff in certiorari, contended, that the books of account were not sufficiently proved to be admitted in evidence.
    
      Chetwood, for defendant.
   Kirkpatrick, C. J., and Eossell, J.

Were of opinion, that the books were sufficiently proved.

Pennington, J.

Notwithstanding the opinion of my brethren, I am not satisfied that the books were sufficiently proved. The witness never saw them till they were produced in court on trial. It has never been held, within my knowledge, that proof of the handwriting of the party is sufficient evidence of [*] his books of account; and it appears to me, dangerous to establish such a precedent. I think nothing of the entry in the waste book, of transaction between a witness and the plaintiff below.

Judgment affirmed. 
      
       Contra, 3 Halst. 68.
      
     