They must be set

dicial notice of the statutes of other states. out in the pleadings, and proved like other facts. Polk v. Butterfield, 9 Colo. 325; Hanley v. Donohue, 116 U. S. 1, 29 L. ed. 535; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Betts, 10 Colo. 431; Talbot v. Seeman, 5 U. S. 1 Cranch, 1, 2 L. ed. 15; Strother v. Lucas, 31 U. S. 6 Pet. 763, 8 L. ed. 573; Armstrong v. Lear, 33 U. S. 8 Pet. 52, 8 L. ed. 863; United States v. Wiggins, 39 U. S. 14 Pet. 334, 10 L. ed. 481; Priestman v. United States, 4 U. S. 4 Dall. 28, 1 L. ed. 727; United States v. Turner, 52 U. S. 11 How. 663, 13.L. ed. 857; Pennington v. Gibson, 57 U. S. 16 How. 65, 14 L. ed. 847; Lamar v. Micou, 114 U. S. 218, 29 L. ed. 94; Frith v. Sprague, 14 Mass. 455; Hooper v. Moore, 50 N. C. 130; Peck v. Hibbard, 26 Vt. 698, 62 Am. Dec. 605; Woodrow v. O'Connor, 28 Vt. 776; Bean v. Briggs, 4 Iowa, 464; Eastman v. Crosby, 8 Allen, 206.

c. The Rule in California.-Official documents may be proved as follows:

1. Acts of the executive of the state, by the records of the state department of the state, and of the United States, by the records of the State Department of the United States, certified by the heads of those departments, respectively. They may also be proved by public documents, printed by the order of the legis lature or Congress, or either house thereof.

2. The proceedings of the legislature of this state, or of Congress, by the journals of those bodies respectively, or either house thereof, or by published statements or resolutions, or by copies certified by the clerk, or printed by their order.

3. The acts of the executive, or the proceedings of the legislature of a sister state, in the same manner.

4. The acts of the executive, or the proceedings of the legislature of a foreign country, by journals published by their authority, or commonly received in that country as such, or by a copy certified under the seal of the country or sovereign, or by a recogni tion thereof in some public act of the executive of the United States.

5. Acts of a municipal corporation of this state, or of a board or department thereof, by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book published by the authority of such a corporation.

6. Documents of any other class in this state, by the original or by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof.

7. Documents of any other class in a sister state, by the original or by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, together with the certificate of the secretary of state, judge of the supreme, superior, or county court, or mayor of a city of such state, that the copy is duly certified by the officer having the legal custody of the original.

8. Documents of any other class in a foreign country, by the original, or by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, with a certificate under seal, of the country or sovereign, that the document is a valid and subsisting document of such country, and that the copy is duly certified by the officer having the legal custody of the original.

9. Documents in the departments of the United States Government, by the certificate of the legal custodian thereof. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1918.

d. The Rule in New York.-First as typical of code legislation the New York Code of Civil Procedure is cited as follows:

"STATUTES, ETC., How PROVED, § 932.-A statute, or joint res olution, passed by the legislature of the state, may be read in evidence, from a newspaper, designated, as prescribed by law, to publish the same, until six months after the close of the session at which it was passed; and, at any time, from a volume printed under the direction of the secretary of state.

"COPIES OF RECORDS AND PAPERS IN CERTAIN OFFICES, PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE, § 933.—A copy of a paper filed, kept, entered or recorded, pursuant to law, in a public office of the state, the officer having charge of which has, pursuant to law, an official seal; or with the clerk of the court of a state; or with the clerk or secretary or either house of the legislature, or of any other public body or public board created by authority of a law of the state, and having, pursuant to law, in such a public office, or by such a clerk or secretary, is evidence, as if the original was produced. But to entitle it to be used in evidence, it must be certified by the clerk of the court, under his hand and the seal of the court; or by the officer having the custody of the original, or by his deputy or clerk, appointed pursuant to law, under his official seal, and the hand of the person certifying; or by the presiding officer, secretary, or clerk of the public body or board, appointed pursuant to law, under his hand, and, except where it is certified by the clerk or secretary of either house of the legislature, under the official seal of the body or board.

"PAPERS FILED WITH TOWN CLERK, § 934.-A copy of a paper filed, pursuant to law, in the office of a town clerk, or a transcript from a record kept therein, pursuant to law, certified by the town clerk, is evidence, with like effect as the original."

e. Rule in United States Courts.-The records of courts of the United States are proved by exemplified copies, under the seal of the court, and certified by the clerk. Pepoon v. Jenkins, 2 Johns. Cas. 119. And by Act of May 14, 1845, it is provided that a copy of any records and proceedings of the district and circuit courts of the United States may be received in evidence in all courts of the state of New York when certified by the clerk or officer in whose custody the same is required by law to be, to have been compared by him with the original, and to be a correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole of such original, and attested by the official seal of such officer. Laws 1845, chap. 303.

Desty, Fed. Proc. § 906, states the rule of the Federal courts, regulating the admission of testimony. The language is: "All records and exemplifications of books, which may be kept in any public office of any state or territory, or of any country subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, not appertaining to a court, shall be proved or admitted in any court or office in any other state or territory, or in any such country by the attestation of the keeper of the said records or books, and the seal of his office annexed, if there be a seal, together with a certificate.

Modern legislation has made ample provision for the introduction of public documents in evidence, and while these various provisions vary somewhat in phraseology, the scope and meaning of their various recitals is substantially the same.

Written laws may be proved by properly authenticated copies; unwritten by parol testimony of experts. Ennis v. Smith, 55 U. S. 14 How. 400, 14 L. ed. 472. Foreign laws must be proved like other facts; they must be verified by oath, or by some high authority not less to be respected than the oath of an individual, Church v. Hubbart, 6 U. S. 2 Cranch, 187, 2 L. ed. 249. A copy of an instrument can be admitted in evidence only upon being proved a true copy. Smith v. Carrington, 8 U. S. 4 Cranch, 62, 2 L. ed. 550. Where copies are made evidence by statute, the mode of authentication must be strictly pursued. The legislature may establish new rules of evidence in derogation of the common

law, but the judicial law is limited to the rule laid down. Smith v. United States, 30 U. S. 5 Pet. 292, 8 L. ed. 130.

Federal courts also provide for the proof of laws and legislative records. The public laws of a state may be read in these courts, and the exercise of any authority which they contain may be deduced historically from them; but private laws and special proceedings are governed by a different rule. Leland v. Wilkinson, 31 U. S. 6 Pet. 317, 8 L. ed. 412; Course v. Stead, 4 U. S. 4 Dall. 22, 1 L. ed. 724.

Printed journals of either house of a legislature published in obedience to law, are competent evidence of its proceedings. Post v. Kendall County Suprs. 105 U. S. 667, 26 L. ed. 1204; South Ottawa v. Perkins, 94 U. S. 260, 24 L. ed. 154.

A pamphlet of the laws of a sister state, purporting to be printed by the law printer, is admissible in evidence. Thompson v. Musser, 1 U. S. 1 Dall. 458, 1 L. ed. 222.

Under the congressional Act of May 26, 1790, chap. 38, copies of the legislative acts of the several states, authenticated by having the seal of the state affixed thereto, are conclusive evidence of such acts in the courts of other states of the Union. No other formality is required than the annexation of the seal, which will be presumed to have been done by an officer having custody thereof and competent authority to affix it. United States v. Amedy, 24 U. S. 11 Wheat. 392, 6 L. ed. 502; Johns, 4 U. S. 4 Dall. 412, 1 L. ed. 888.

United States v.

It is now well settled that the statute books of a sister state purporting to be published under the authority of the state are competent proof of its statute law. Young v. Bank of Alexandria, 8 U. S. 4 Cranch, 384, 2 L. ed. 655; Raynham v. Canton, 3 Pick. 295; Mullen v. Morris, 2 Pa. 85; Danforth v. Reynolds, 1 Vt. 265; State v. Abbey, 29 Vt. 60, 67 Am. Dec. 754. A foreign statute may be proved by the testimony of a practicing attorney of that jurisdiction; but resort to this grade of evidence is not favored. Kopke v. People, 43 Mich. 41.

34. Refreshing Memory by the Use of. - A document which may be inadmissible intrinsically and per se as primary or secondary evidence, either because it does not embody the substance of the issue, or because it is in the nature of hearsay, will often be admissible to refresh the memory of a witness, and to enable him to speak on the matters to which it refers.

It appears that such a document may be handed to a witness for inspection, and that the witness may give oral evidence accordingly, after a perusal of its contents:

1. When the writing actually revives in his mind a recollection of the facts to which it refers.

2. When, although it fail to revive such a recollection, it creates a knowledge or belief in the witness that, at the time when the writing was made, he knew or believed it to contain an accurate statement of such facts.

3. When, although the writing revives neither a recollection of the facts nor of a former conviction of its accuracy, the witness is satisfied that the writing would not have been made unless the facts which it purports to describe had occurred accordingly. Powell, Ev. (4th ed.) 359, 360.

It is not necessary that the memorandum should have been actually made by the witness, if he can otherwise make it an original source of personal recollection. Thus, a witness has been allowed to refresh his memory from a paper which he remembers to have recognized as a correct narrative when the facts were fresh in his memory. Duchess of Kingston's Case, 20 How. St. Tr. 619.

There is no precise time within which a writing must be shown to have been made before it can be used by a witness. It is not necessary that it should have been made contemporaneously with the occurrence of the fact; but it ought to have been made soon afterwards, or at least within such a subsequent time as will support a reasonable probability that the memory of the witness had not become impaired when the statement was committed to paper. Powell, Ev. (4th ed.) 362, 363.

It appears to be only necessary that the witness should swear positively that the memorandum was made at a time when he had a distinct recollection of the facts, and ante litem motam. Wood V. Cooper, 1 Car. & K. 646.

The memorandum must either have been made by the witness or recognized by him, at or about the time when it was made, as a correct account. It must not contain any of the elements of hearsay, and it will therefore be inadmissible if it appear to be the statement of a third person (Anonymous, Ambl. 252) as where it had been drawn up by such a person from the witness's own memoranda; or even if it be a copy made by the witness himself from