Definition
An examined copy is a duplicate of a record, public book, or official register that has been compared against the original document to verify its accuracy. The term signals a specific evidentiary status: not merely any copy, but one whose fidelity to the original has been confirmed through direct comparison. At common law, examined copies of public records were admissible in evidence as a substitute for the original, on the principle that public records and registers should not be removed from their official custody and transported to court for every proceeding in which their contents are relevant.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering "examined copy" in historical legal materials — particularly pre-twentieth-century English and American sources — should recognize it as a term of evidentiary art, not a casual synonym for photocopy or duplicate. Its significance lies in the authentication procedure it implies: someone with access to the original compared it line by line with the copy, and that process is what gave the copy its evidentiary standing.
In modern practice, the function of the examined copy has been largely absorbed by statutory schemes governing certified copies and official attestation. Many jurisdictions now treat a certified copy bearing an official seal as presumptively reliable without requiring a sworn comparison. Researchers using nineteenth-century case law or pleading records should not assume that "examined copy" maps cleanly onto the modern certified copy — the procedural context differs, and the authentication mechanism is distinct.
The cross-jurisdictional picture matters here. In English common law practice, as Burrill notes, the examining party — the one intending to use the copy — typically swore to the comparison themselves, after the copy had been prepared by the record's custodian. American practice varied, with some courts requiring the oath of the custodian or a neutral officer rather than the interested party. Primary source researchers working across English and American materials should not assume the procedural requirements were uniform.
The term is most likely to appear in treatises on evidence, rules of court, and pleading practice from the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries, and in cases turning on documentary proof of title, probate records, court judgments, or public registers. It is unlikely to appear as an operative term in modern U.S. federal or state rules of evidence, where its function is subsumed under authentication rules governing public records.
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical dictionaries are in close agreement on the core definition, and all trace to the same authority: 1 Campbell 469 (a reference to Campbell's Nisi Prius reports). Black's (both editions) and Bouvier's track each other closely, defining the examined copy as a copy of a record, public book, or register that has been compared with the original.
Bouvier adds the most instructive elaboration, explaining the evidentiary rationale in two parts: first, the public inconvenience that would result from requiring original public records to travel to court; and second, that any fraud or mistake in the examined copy would be readily detectable because of the comparison process. This dual justification — practical necessity and built-in reliability — is worth noting for researchers trying to understand why courts accepted secondary evidence in this form at all.
Burrill's entry is the most procedurally specific. It situates the term explicitly in English practice, describes the copy as first prepared by the custodial officer, and requires the examining party — the one who intends to use the document — to swear that they compared it with the original. This detail about who takes the oath, and when, distinguishes the examined copy from other authenticated documents and is absent from the Black's entries.
None of the historical sources address the decline of the term or its relationship to the certified copy that eventually displaced it in statutory evidence schemes. Researchers should supply that evolution from treatises on evidence law rather than from these dictionary entries alone.
Jurisdictional Note
The examined copy was most thoroughly developed as a doctrine in English common law courts and was carried into American practice with significant procedural variation. In some American jurisdictions, authentication requirements for public record copies were formalized by statute before the Civil War, displacing the common law examined copy procedure. Modern researchers should consult the specific jurisdiction's evidence rules and any governing public records statutes.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
No Law Mind Encyclopedia entry directly addresses the evidentiary doctrine of the examined copy. The nearest adjacent topics are treated in:
criminal_182: Confrontation Clause — Right to Cross-Examination (The Law Mind Criminal Law Encyclopedia) [for evidentiary authentication and documentary evidence context]