94
and "belief," albeit not to their knowledge."
But this, as I have said, is in all cases.
there are cases where even the fommon Law Courts, ex necessitate, are as liberal
αν
• their rivals : _ and cases
of character, property, and relationship are amongst
them.
"Where character is at "issue, says the late Mr.
Roscoe, (5th Ed.
-(5th
dipp 32-59.) hearsayevidence of the representations of third persons is admitted: and.
-
}
566
it is not necessary to "produce those persons/per Lord Kenyon C.S. in Houlkes
v Vellway, 3. Exp. 236]."
"In order," says the same
profound jurist, (pp. 576-7) tobring the case within the statute, evidence of
4
ک من
reputation of ownership is admissible; (Oliver Bartlett 1. B. VB. 269.):-
Until the year 1894, when,
for the convenience of the "Courts," the existing rule
adopted confining the admissibility of hearsay evidence of pedigree to
was
to the
Page 570Page 571