It being libelled, That 100l. had been sent to the defender to buy furniture, and that most of the sum was not bestowed, and therefore being craved repetition; a missive letter, though not holograph, was sustained as a sufficient instruction of the facts.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Earl of Northesk pursues the Viscount of Stormont on this ground, that he having sent £100 Sterling to London, to the umquhile Viscount of Stormorrt, to be employed for household furniture, the most part thereof was not employed, and for instructing his libel, produces several missive letters of the Viscount's, one holograph, another having an holograph postscript, and a third written with another hand, which did state the account, and acknowledged the debt. It was alleged for the defender, that the only letter which had any special probation in it, was the last, which is not holograph. It was answered, that the subject matter being a sum sent for furniture, which uses not to be redacted in writ, the Viscount's letter subscribed by him, though not holograph, is sufficient to prove, for bills of exchange so subscribed, or letters among merchants are sufficient; and this letter being amongst noble persons in such a small particular, which requires not ordinarily writ, must be of the same force, especially seeing there are also produced two other missives not controverted, which comparatione liter arum, are clearly the same with this letter in question.
The Lords found that this letter, though not holograph, was a sufficient instruction, having compared the same with the other not controverted subscriptions; the pursuer making faith, that this is the same letter which he received from the deceased Viscount, his servant or messenger.
