Mr. Maitland proceeded to state that his instructions wera that the book was privileged. It would be sah a book. It would not per-airist public policy to put in
haps be against public policy in the case of the particular entry referred to, but there were other entries making it inadvisable that the book should be admitted. He objected to the entry being put in as an exhibit: because the exhibit could not be put in unless the hook were.
Mr. Lipson Ward submitted that a person could not say, "This is a private note of mine and 1 refuse to produce it." Privieged documents only covered particularly well-known instances—communications between legal: adviser and their clients, husbands and wives and official secrets. It was not so material that it should be put in by counsel examining-in-chief, but he (My. Lipson Ward) would be remiss if he did not put it in for the benefit of counsel After lengthy argument, his Lordship said it was clear to him the book was not one which could be successfully objected to if put in as an exhibit. Witness could certainly use the entry. If the witness were entitled to use it to refresh his memory, when he used it it must be open to inspection by both sides. It could be put in his hands with the necessary entry available.
Continuing, witness—recalled plaintiff having reported the accident to him. Romancf stated that his clothes, worth $15, had been burnt, but he made no complaint of being burt.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.