Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 2).pdf/153

 A single question as to the admissibility of certain evidence remains to be considered. The wife of plaintiff was allowed, against the defendant's objection, to testify to exclamations of pain made by the plaintiff on waking up during the night. She said: "Well, he has more than once woke up-more than once in the night-groaning; and I asked him what was the matter." The record discloses nothing further on this point. It does not appear that she testified touching his answer to her inquiry as to what was the matter with him. We are very clearly of the opinion that this evidence was admissible, both on principle and under the great weight of the adjudications. There was no attempt to prove a narration by him of a past transaction. He was not stating that the night before he had suffered pain. He was making no communication whatever to her. It was only the involuntary expression of suffering. True, it might have been simulated, but that was a question for the jury. The evidence of the physician relating to the extent of his injuries must have rested in some degree upon statements of the plaintiff to him, and therefore what is more truly hearsay than exclamations of pain. The testimony of the medical expert may often be founded mainly upon such interested declarations of the patient, and yet its competency cannot be seriously questioned. On the other hand, the rule allowing the proof of the expression of present pain will rarely result in imposition upon juries or other triers of questions of fact. Other facts in the case will generally aid them in determining how much of real and how much of fictitious pain the expression of suffering shadows forth. We think the true rule is stated in Railroad Co. v. Newell, 104 Ind. 264-269, 3 N. E. Rep. 836: "Where, however, it becomes important to illustrate the physical or mental condition of an individual, either at the time an injury is received, or from thence to the time of an inquiry as to its severity, effect and nature, we think expressions or declarations of present existing pain or malady, whether made at the time the injury is received or subsequently to it, are admissible in evidence; [citing many authorities.] Expressions of preg-