Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a process against the heir of the granter of a holograph writ, he was found obliged, upon the construction of the act of Parliament 1669, to depone upon the verity of his predecessor's subscription; the words of the act being, “except the pursuer offer to prove by the defender's oath,” &c. by which it was not meant that an heir's acknowledging, that, in his opinion, it was his father's subscription, was relevant; for that would be no better than the opinion of any other witness who might know the defunct's subscription comparatione, and would render the act of Parliament useless; but only that upon the construction of the act the heir is obliged to depone; and if he should acknowledge he saw his father subscribe, or the like, it would be the same as if the subscriber had, while in life, acknowledged his own subscription.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 155. Kilkerran. C. Home.
*** This case is No 26. p. 9417. voce Oath of Party.
