Such entries have been admitted in this country in a great variety of cases; as a private memorandum of marriages kept by a clergyman and the baptismal registry of a church; Blackburn v. Crawford, 3 Wall. (U. S.) 175, 18 L. Ed. 186 ; American Life Ins. Co. & Trust Co. v. Rosenagle, 77 Pa. 507; Hunt v. Order of Chosen Friends, 64 Mich. 671, 31 N. W. 576, 8 Am. St. Rep. 855; Ken nedy v. Doyle, 10 Allen (Mass.) 161; Meconce v. Mower, 37 Kan. 298, 15 Pac. 155; Weaver v. Leiman, 52 Md. 708; the minutes of a church conference; Pettyjohn's Ex'r v. Petty john, 1 Houst. (Del.) 332; Rayburn v. Elrod, 43 Ala. 700; Nason v. First Church, 66 Me. 100 ; the diary of an attorney ; Burke v. Baker, 188 N. Y. 561, 80 N. E. 1033 ; a log book; U. S. v. Mitchell, 3 Wash. C. C. 95, Fed. Cas. No. 15,792; contra, Cameron v. Rich, 5 Rich. L. (S. C.) 352, 52 Am. Dec. 747; a physician's entries in the ward book of an asylum; State v. Hinkley, 9 N. J. L. J. 118; a school register; Falls v. Gamble, 66 N. C. 455; a diploma to show that a physician had his degree; Holmes v. Heide, 74 Me. 28, 43 Am. Rep. 567.
The following have been held inadmissible as such entries: Commercial rating of a commercial agency; Richardson v. Stringfel low, 100 Ala. 416, 14 South. 283; Baker v. Ashe, 80 Tex. 356, 16 S. W. 36; Henderson v. Miller, 36 Ill. App. 232; the book of a car inspector; Hicks v. Southern Ry., 63 S. C. 559, 41 S. E. 753; a nurse's record of what transpired at the testator's sick bed; In re Flint's Estate, 100 Cal. 391, 34 Pac. 863; a school catalogue; State v. Daniels, 44 N. EL 383; the certificate of a weigher's assistant, not himself an official; Prew v. Donahue, 118 Mass. 438. See 1 Greenl. Ev. f 115. Originally such statements, to be admissi ble, must have been in writing, and the first authority for the admission of oral state ments is a dictum of Lord Campbell in the Sussex Peerage Case, 11 Cl. & Fin. 113,/ for which the only authority cited, 3 B. & Ad. 890, was a case of written evidence, but it was followed by the admission of a state ment in the nature of a report by a consta ble to his superior officer; 13 Cox C. C. 293. Oral statements of deceased physicians were admitted to show the disease of which the insured had died in a suit on a life ance policy; McNair v. Ins. Co., 13 Hun (N. Y.) 144 ; but such statements as to the nature of her illness, when offered by re spondent in. a petition for dissolution of marriage in support of cross charges, were re jected as not made in the course of duty; 22 T. L. R. 52; and verbal reports of a foreman to a superintendent as to matters material to the issue were admitted; Williams v. Walton & Whann Co., 9 Roust. (Del.) 322, 32 All 726. See 19 Harv. L. Rev. 301.
Declarations by a party of his intention, where that is of itself a distinct and ma terial fact in a chain of circumstances, are admissible; Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hillman, 145U. S. 285, 12 Sup. Ct. 909, 36 L Ed. 706; such declarations being acts from which in tention may be inferred; Com. v. Trefethen,
157 Mass. 189, 31 N. E. 961, 24 L. R. A. 235; Buel V. State, 104 Wis. 149, 80 N. W. 78.
Declarations regarded as secondary evi dence or hearsay are yet admitted in some cases: first, in matters of general and public interest, common reputation being admis sible as to matters of public interest; 6 M. & W. 234; Noyes v. Ward, 19 Conn. 250; but reputation amongst those only connected with the place or business in question, in regard to matters of general interest mere ly ; 1 Cr. M. & R. 929; 2 B. & Ad. 245; El licott v. Pearl, 10 Pet. (U. S.) 412, 9 L. Ed. 475; Southwest School Dist. v. Williams, 48 Conn. 504; McCall v. U. S., 1 Dak. 320, 46 N. W. 608; and the matter must be of a quasi. public nature; 10 B. & G. 657; Elli cott v. Pearl, 10 Pet. (U. S.) 412, 9 L. Ed. 475; Brander v. Ferriday, 16 La. 296; see REpIITATiON ; second, in cases of ancient pos session where ancient documents are admit ted, if found in a place in which and under the care of persons with whom such papers might reasonably (in the opinion of the trial judge; 1 Chase Steph. Dig. Evid. 156) be ex pected to be found; Inhabitants of Green field v. Inhabitants of Camden, 74 Me. 56; Applegate v. Lexington & C. County Min. Co., 117 U. S. 255, 6 Sup. Ct. 742, 29 L. Ed. 892; Quinn v. Eagleston, 108 Ill. 248; 'if they purport to be a part of the transaction to which they relate; 1 Green]. Ev. § 144; see ANCIENT WRITINGS ; third, in case of dec larations and entries made against the in terest of the party making them, whether made concurrently with the act or subse quently ; 3 B. & Ad. 893; Cramer v. Gregg, 40 111. App. 442 ; Irish-American Bank v. Ludlum, 49 Minn. 255, 51 N. W. 1047 ; Keesey v. Old, 82 Tex. 22, 17 S. W. 928; Potter v. Ogden, 136 N. Y. 384, 33 N. E. 228; but such declarations and entries, to be so admitted, must appear or be shown to be against the pecuniary interest of the party making them; 11 CL & F. 85; 2 Jac. & W. 789; 3 Bingh. N. C. 308; Drawdy v. Hesters, 130 Ga. 161, 60 S. E. 451, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 190; and if so they may be admitted, whether or not made in the ordinary course of business, as where a solicitor charges himself with re ceipts on his client's behalf ; 53 W. R. 169; but letters written and signed by one de ceased, or a memorandum made by him, are not admissible by a party claiming under him if not shown to have been communicat ed to the party claiming adversely; Elsberg v. Sewards, 66 Hun 28, 21 N. Y. Supp. 10; it was established by the Sussex Peerage Case, 1 Cl. & Fin. 85, that the interest must be either pecuniary or proprietary ; this ex cluded the admission by a clergyman that he had unlawfully solemnized a marriage, which was so far against his interest that it would have subjected him to punishment ; this ruling has been generally accepted, but that It is so has been said to be "highly un fortunate"; 1 Gr. on Ev. (16th Ed. by Wig more) § 152 d; fourth, dying declarations.