Definition
In the law of evidence, an indication is a sign, token, or circumstantial fact that points toward an inference or conclusion without itself constituting direct proof. It is a piece of circumstantial evidence that directs the mind toward a probable finding — not by demonstrating a fact outright, but by making one more likely. Bouvier distinguishes indication from "show": to show is to make something apparent or clear through evidence, to prove; to indicate is merely to point, suggest, or give direction. An indication may amount to no more than a symptom of an underlying fact.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): An act of pointing out or indicating; a fact that shows something exists or may happen; a mark or symbol representing something; also, in medical usage, a symptom or clinical finding that warrants a particular treatment or diagnostic test.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "That which serves to indicate or point out; mark; token; sign; symptom; evidence." Also: discovery made; information; explanation or display.
The gap between common and legal meaning is narrow but real. In ordinary usage, "indication" is loose and intuitive — a general signal that something may be true. In the law of evidence, the term carries technical weight: it denotes a specific category of circumstantial proof, a fact in evidence that triggers an inferential process toward a conclusion of fact. The medical sense (a clinical finding warranting a remedy) is structurally analogous to the legal sense, which may explain why the term migrated naturally into evidence doctrine.
Common Confusion
Indication is sometimes used interchangeably with "inference," but the two are not synonymous. An indication is the evidentiary fact itself — the sign or token presented. An inference is the conclusion the mind draws from that fact. The indication points; the inference arrives. Similarly, indication should not be conflated with "presumption," which is a legal rule directing the factfinder to draw a specific conclusion from a given fact. An indication invites reasoning; a presumption commands it.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in historical evidence doctrine will encounter "indication" most heavily in treatises on circumstantial evidence, particularly in discussions of what older writers called "indirect" or "presumptive" proof. Burrill's Circumstantial Evidence — the primary authority cited across all four source dictionaries — develops the term at length and uses it as a near-technical category sitting below presumption in evidentiary weight. Researchers should treat citations to pages 251–275 of that treatise as the conceptual anchor for any historical use of "indication" in evidence contexts.
The term also appears in an entirely different legal domain — intellectual property — where "geographical indication" or "indication of source" refers to a sign identifying goods as originating from a particular region. This usage is structurally unrelated to the evidence doctrine meaning but shares the same root concept of a sign pointing to an origin or conclusion. Researchers moving between IP materials and evidence materials should be alert to context: the word carries different technical freight in each domain, and conflating the two produces analytical error.
In older American and English case law, "indication" may appear in jury instructions or judicial opinions as part of circumstantial-evidence analysis without being defined by the court. When encountered in that context, Burrill's treatment is the proper interpretive reference. Bouvier's additional citation to 104 Pa. St. 133 suggests Pennsylvania courts engaged the term in evidence doctrine by the late nineteenth century; researchers in Pennsylvania legal history may find that citation a useful anchor.
Historical Dictionary Support
All four source dictionaries agree on the core definition: a sign or token; a fact pointing to some inference or conclusion. The language is nearly identical across Black's (1st and 2nd editions) and Burrill, all tracing to the same passage in Burrill's Circumstantial Evidence. This uniformity reflects the term's derivation from a single authoritative treatise rather than from accumulated case law.
Bouvier adds the most analytical texture. It distinguishes indication from "show" — a distinction that reveals the evidentiary hierarchy at work in nineteenth-century evidence theory: indication suggests, show proves. Bouvier also notes that an indication "may be merely a symptom," flagging its position at the weaker end of the inferential spectrum. This nuance is absent from Black's entries, which stop at the bare definition.
None of the historical dictionaries address the intellectual property usage of "indication," which developed primarily through international trade agreements in the twentieth century and is therefore invisible to these nineteenth-century sources. Researchers should not expect historical dictionary support for that meaning.
Jurisdictional Note
The evidence-doctrine meaning of "indication" does not vary significantly by jurisdiction in its core sense, as it reflects general common-law evidentiary reasoning rather than statutory definition. The intellectual property meaning — geographical indications — is governed in the United States primarily through federal trademark and unfair competition law, and internationally through the TRIPS Agreement and the Lisbon Agreement; treatment varies meaningfully across jurisdictions.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Geographic Indications and Certification Marks — Law Mind Intellectual Property Encyclopedia (ip_72). Note: This entry addresses the IP domain meaning only. No Law Mind Encyclopedia entry currently covers "indication" in its evidence-doctrine sense; researchers should consult entries on circumstantial evidence and presumptions for that context.