Blair v. Blair

Stewart, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. There is not that precise and specific statement and embodiment of the testimony in the bills of exception, usual, but as the commission containing the deposition of the witness Culbertson, with the accompanying exhibits appears in the record ; and there is no averment that they are not the same referred to in the exception; we think there is a sufficient- identification of the evidence to support the exceptions. ⁵⁷¹ It would be rather too technical a proceeding to refuse the review of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and seventh exceplions, for the reasons assigned by the appellee’s counsel under such circumstances. These exceptions, as also the letter, may be considered together, and we find no error in the rulings of the Circuit Court in regard thereto. Exhibit B being a copy of the Constitution of the Insurance Company, of which John Blair, (as appears by Exhibit A referred to in the second exception,) was a member, was, with Exhibit A, admissible as part of the plaintiff’s testimony, to show that she, as the widow of said Blair, was entitled upon his death intestate, to a certain amount of money, according to the terms of the contract between him and the company.

Exhibit E, being a letter from Nones, Secretary, addressed to Livingston, then Secretary, and Exhibit D, referred to in the seventh exception and fourth interrogatory to Culbertson, the witness, purporting to be the receipt for money, executed by the appellant, wore admissible to show in what way the money came to be paid to the appellant. This testimony was explanatory of the transaction, and was not irrelevant, nor obnoxious to the rule of inter alios, and the appellant had no right to have it excluded. The testimony objected to in the fourth exception, being part of the answer of Culbertson to the sixth interrogatory, (who, it appears was the Grand Secretary and Treasurer of the Conductors’ Lile Insurance Company, and the custodian of all the records and proceedings,) was admissible, to show there was no other contract with the Company except that furnished by Exhibit A. In the absence of any evidence to prove any other contract, this testimony was unnecessary; but we do not see in what way the appellant could be prejudiced thereby. There was no error in the ruling in this exception. ⁵⁷² Exhibit Gc, referred to in the fifth exception purported to be the letter of the President of the Insurance Company, and was properly admitted, for the purpose of showing the measures taken to raise the money upon the death of John Blair.

It was incumbent on the plaintiff in this action, to show by any relevant testimony, the foundation and character of her claim to the money, accruing under the contract with her husband John Blair, and the Insurance Company. It was necessary to