baker versus lord FAIRFAX ibidem deposition take before no evidence after  witness become interest Tilleys case report also ld raym on a issue out of  chancery one of the witness after his deposition take become interest and  confess it now upon a voire dire he be reject then it be desire to read his  deposition as if he be dead and a case be urge where in chancery a witness be  make executor and revive the suit and be read at the hear but the chief  justice remember the case in salk which be the resolution of two court on a  trial at bar and so he refuse to hear the deposition the reason rely upon in  Tilleys case be that the deposition be in perpetuan rei memory the intent of  they be to perpetuate testimony in case the witness die and therefore they can  not be read in any case between other party till after the death of the  witness who ought to appear and give evidence so long as he live much less can  they be read where the witness be himself a party but in Holcroft v smith  where a witness become interest after his deposition have be take in chief the  court of c b refuse to permit it to be read upon the ground that he be still  live I Eq can Abr pl but the practice of court of equity be contrary vide the  opinion of the Lord keeper in Holcroft v smith gosse v Tracy vern p wms S haw  v hand atk Glyn v the bank of England ves neither do court of law in all case  adhere strict to the principle of refuse to admit deposition in evidence when  the witness be still live for they may be read when the witness be beyond the  reach of judicial process Lord Altham v Lord Anglesey pale yellow Cas in Eq  Mod SC or where he can not be find or be sick and unable to attend fry v wood  atk pale yellow law of eved Edward bull l n p they also admit other proof in  some case where a witness who be alive become incompetent from interest as  where the only survive witness to a bind become administrator or executor to  the obligee Godfrey v Norris ante goss v Tracy I p wms to these last case Lord  keeper resemble the present in Holcroft v smith strange report er p