Spokane & Vancouver Gold & Copper Co. v. Colfelt

Citations

• 24 Wash. 568
• 64 P. 847
• 1901 Wash. LEXIS 571

Syllabus

<p>EVIDENCE-HEARSAY-ADMISSIBILITY AS EES GESTAE.</p> <p>In an action to recover a mining claim, in which the issue was as to whether plaintiff and its assignors had performed the necessary amount of development work for the year 1898, the testimony of a witness that one of the original owners had pointed out to him the work done on the claim in 1898 is hearsay evidence, and is not admissible, even on the ground of being part of the res gestae surrounding the negotiations for the purchase of the claim, since the matter in contention was whether the requisite amount of work had been done, and the negotiations for the purchase of the claim were not in dispute.</p> <p>SAME.</p> <p>The admission of testimony hy the witness who had given hearsay testimony as to the development work of 1898 having been pointed out to him by the person who claimed to have done the work, that he had made efforts to procure the attendance of such person at the trial, but was unable to secure him as a witness, was erroneous, since the incompetency of hearsay evidence cannot be cured by showing that a witness who will testify to the fact cannot be found.</p> <p>SAME-PRESUMPTIONS IN AID OF JUDGMENT.</p> <p>It will be presumed in aid of a judgment, where the instructions are not before the appellate court for review, that errors of the trial court in the admission of testimony were corrected by withdrawing the objectionable testimony from the jury, since the presumption naturally attaches, where the record shows that the trial court acted affirmatively in the commission of error, that it maintained the same view of the law to the end of the case.</p>