The 'Opposite party may on the memorandum; 6 C. & P. 281 ; Mt. Terry Min. Co. v. White, 10 S. D. 620, 74 N. W. 1060; Schwickert V. Levin, 76 App. Div. 373, 78 N. Y.' Supp. 394; Cortland Mfg. Co. v. Platt, 83 Mich. 419, 47 N. W. 330. This ex tends only to the part covered by the memo randa used by the witness ; Com. v. Haley, 13 Allen (Mass.) 587; Parks v. Biebel, 18 Colo. App. 12, 69 Pac. 273 ; contra, People v. Lyons, 49 Mich. 78, 13 N. W. 365 ; State v. Bacon, 41 Vt. 526, 98 Am. Dec. 616; 2 C. & P. 325.
While a witness may refresh his memory by use of an original memorandum made by him, he may not in general testify wholely therefrom without having some recollection independently of the memorandum ; South ern Ry. Co. v. State, 165 Ind. 613, 75 N. E. 272 ; Johnson v. State, 125 Ga. 243, 54 S. E. 184 (contra, Akins v. Banking Co., 111 Ga. 815, 35 S. E. 671). If the witness depends entirely upon books of account, and not at all upon his recollection, he should not be permitted to testify from them, as the books are the best evidence ; Eatman v. State, 48 Fla. 21, 37 South. 576.
A stenographer may testify to the correct ness of her notes, and read them in the trial court, where she took the testimony of cer tain witnesses before the grand jury ; Keith v. State, 157 Ind. 376, 61 N. E. 716; so of a former trial ; Toohey v. Plummer, 69 Mich. 345, 37 N. W. 297; though independently of her notes she has no knowledge of such tes timony ; State v. Smith, 99 Ia. 26,, 68 N. W. 428, Am. St. Rep. 219 ; Miles v. Walker, 66 Neb. 728, 92 N. W. 1014; he may read from his longhand notes; Harmon v. Terri tory; 15 Okl. 147, 79 Pac. 765.
A witness may refresh his memory from notes taken by counsel or other persons at a former trial, or from his own testimony at such time; State v. Dean, 72 S. C. 74, 51 S.
E. 524; or testimony taken down by him in the grand jury • room ; Luttrell v. State, 40 Tex. Cr. R. 651, 51 S. W. 930; or from a stenographic report of his evidence at a former trial ; Portsmouth Street R. Co. v. Peed's Adner, 102 Va. 662, 47 S. E. 850.
On an issue as to prior invention a witness may refresh his memory as to the time and Issue of the invention from contemporaneous newspaper articles which he read; at the time; Bragg Mfg. Co. v. New York, 141 Fed. 118.
A partner may refresh his memory from his ledger entries showing the gross amounts of invoices sold to customers and • payments thereon, posted at the end of each month, where he had examined them at or near the time they were made and then knew them 'to be correct; Grunberg v. U. S., 145 Fed. 81,
76 C. C. A. 51.
Where a newspaper. reporter; was present when the police examined a bag made notes of the contents, which were published in his newspaper, and he examined the pub lication and found it correct, and then de stroyed his notes, he was allowed to refresh his memory by reference to the published.rec ord; Erdman v. State, so. Neb. 642• 134- N. W. 258, Ann. Cas. 1913B, 577. Where a•writ er of articles in a newspaper testifiedzthat all the articles written by him were true, a court allowed him to examine one of his ar ticles and testify whether he had doubt that the fact was as therein stated ; 1 C. & K. 320.
A medical expert in a poison case, who "had opened the body and committed the ap pearances to writing," was allowed to read the writing to the jury ; 18 Hovi: St. Tr. 1138. in the Trial of Webster, Bemis-91.
A witness was called to give an account of a voyage, and was shown the -log book, the entries in which were not made by him. He testified that he had examined the entries from time to time while they were fresh and always found them accurate; held that they could be used as if he had made them him self ; 2 Campb. 112.
Where a witness has made a memorandum of certain investigations, and on the follow ing day had it copied on the typewriter, and signed a copy and sent it as a report to his superior, he may be permitted to refresh his recollection by the typewritten memoran dum.; Edwards v. Gimbel, 202 Pa. 30, 51 Atl. 357.
An officer who has taken goods on legal process may refresh his memory from a copy of a return made out in his presence and under his direction ; Flohr v. Territory, 14 Oki. 477, 78 Pac. 565 ; so of an officer who searched defendant's premises on a prosecu tion for keeping intoxicating liquor ; State v. Costa, 78 Vt. 198, 62 Atl. 38; a bank teller testifying to checks on the bank. may use entries 'in his books, though some of them were not written by him; Breese v. U. S., 106 Fed. 680, 45'C. C. A. 535. A jailer may refer the jail record made by himself as to days- when defendant was in jail and When he was discharged ;- State v. Kennedy, 154 Mo. 268, 55 S. W. 298.