Stewart v. Todd

I. Something should be said upon the admission of secondary evi*303dence to prove the contents of the alleged lost written contract. The majority opinion has the statement that:

“The original of this contract was not produced on the trial. Its absence was accounted for, and secondary evidence of its contents rightly permitted.”

Again:

“The loss of the contract was fully accounted for. Search was made-in every place.”

This surely treats the right to introduce secondary evidence as being a question in the case. So treating it, I point out, among other reasons for holding that no sufficient foundation…