prefent at the birth of a child in proof of pedigree. 3Mod.36.to fhew that the Defendant's rule of evidence is too ftrict.
Upon full argument, THE COURT over ruled the evidence, upon the principle contended for by the defendant's council.
Some of the defendant's council, the next day, offered fome of Doctor Coxe's letters to David Lloyd, fhowing that the conditon had been complied with.
BUT THE COURT adhered to their opinion, and over-ruled thefe letters alfo.–A verdict paffed for the plaintiff, by which the fenfe of the Jury was, that the non performance of conditions of fettlement, did not voif the grant. [♦]
THE Plaintiff, among other evidence, offered a Map, made by one Zimmerman, about thirty years ago. One John Knorr, Zimmerman's nephew, proved that faid Map was the work of his Uncle, at the requeft of the People of Germantown ; that his Uncle dying before he was paid for it, it remained in the family ; that it contains the lines of the Germantown Lots, and the adjacent out Lands ; that, upon any difficulty, they apply to him, and this Map generally determines any difputes they may have about their Lines.
Mr. Chow oppofed this Map, at firft, but afterwards agreed that the Lands in controversy were as laid down in it, and admitted it with a falvo of its being no precedent. Upon the Plaintiff's offerings it to the Jury to take out with them. Mr. Chow opposed it ; and fome difference arifing, THE COURT declared it was not proper evidence, that they fhould not have allowed its being offered to the Jury, nor would they fuffer them to take it out with them.
[♦]Determined at Cheƒter. Ni. Pri. 24th August 1773.