2 D.C. 105
Decided November 15, 1814
Debt on bond. Plea non est factum, and issue. offered a deposition of the plaintiff’s son, to prove the handwriting of the obligor and subscribing witnesses, who resided in London, and were not proved to be dead. contended that this was not sufficient evidence of the execution of a bond. That it is only in commercial causes that the rule has been relaxed. The subscribing witnesses are supposed to be living, and a commission might issue to take their depositions.
Decided 1814-11-15
¶1permitted the evidence to go to the jury, not as conclusive, but primá facie evidence of the execution of the bond.
¶2The Court also permitted Isaac Entwirtle to be examined as a witness for the defendant, although he was her surety in her administration bond; on the authority of the case in Esp. N. P. 163, and the case of Carter v. Pearce, 1 T. R. 163. See also Craig v. Reintzel, post.