Could it be still maintained that the two were
so identical and inseparable that the disabilities attaching to a
document must necessarily attach to the person? In my opinion, certainly
not. Or, to take another case, let us suppose that the will had been
tattooed upon the leg of a person, and, under similar circumstances, the
leg were cut off and produced before the Court, either in a flesh or a
mummified condition; could it then be seriously advanced that because the
inscribed leg--standing on the table before the Court--had once belonged
to the witness sitting in the witness-box, therefore it was not competent
for the witness to give evidence on account of his or her documentary
attributes? Certainly it could not. Therefore, it seems to me that that
which is separable must, for the purpose of law, be taken as already
separated, and that the will on the back of this witness must be looked
upon as though it were in the hands at this moment, of the officers of
the Court, and consequently I overrule the objection."
"Will your Lordship take a note of your Lordship's decision?" asked the
Attorney-General in view of an appeal.
"Certainly, Mr. Attorney. Let this witness be sworn.
Pages:
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257