Albuquerque weekly citizen. (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1891-19??, 1894-12-01
Dt-rs,Cr sorsr.
N-r, ,mpsv,ss, ops o. ISSUED NJ
IudHe q ottIer

gra, deal ~ interest," ny lugsnts, ~ will
l- sen ny the opn,"u tia, the idgr
,ldr that IN ruts 90 prumlssury uut.r
the defendants must hir n sun duubl,' IL
the account entitled HIN tn b- hcAri N
c" r. unlrss this II done the pIoiu,ifi
caun"i recover Judgment,
These arr suits IN prpnissurJ nutcs
AID III. drt-ndAnt1, ~ each Ease, hAV.' IA.
terls~.-i piraa 1T nnn-ArSumIrh, upon
" hirh plrss irrur has lr-n julu~i. tue
suits we're pending upon the plradingr
Aipvr =, citri ter several months piIur To-
the Sth day IL November, 1894. VIII u
thrrr was hl~i ~ zach case the uutIuu
~ before mr iii confederation. IhlH
motion II Tor judgm"n, ia favor ~ plain.
I n go = pTonirr"ry note "tur thu f,sH',h
tnai III sam- H. not irul"d uWirr ~ h 40
r,glui -d 10y nc,tinn ISIS IT the complied
laws Il New Mr,ru" The HpCtInit ~.
irrr-, - pr,Viirr tina, accounts duly
verified by the oath 1T the party claiming
the aam-, or hns agent, and prutui-putS
notes aud other Instruments in Writing.
not barr,-i 10y the pi,'vIrinnr 1T thi- act.
shall b. sufficient evidence ~ any sui ,u
enAhle the plaintiff u recover jItgInrut
f,,r tue Amuun, thereof. unless Tia. drirrd
ant, ur hr agent, shall deny tue rau,
uudrr cath "
Is clsimrd 10y thu plHintiif that ia,
denial under oath ~ this r,'cttun ,ur u
written d-niA hl-i WI h the plrAdi x,
aud that tue failure Ia intrrIu=- n go.
titles the plaintiff iojWIgm"nt VII H. 10y
the d-frndauts II ~ cnut-ndr'i that sue
denial means testimony at the trial In
supper, ~ thr cont-n ion, def iAnts
urge that the plrlp-- ot the enactment 81
the a.ct,un was Ia -nshl- plaintiffs, SUNG
| u,pin oIen accounts, To Avud "AI-nn- ui
taking hrIS~i,ubr "r app" = ng Ht court
Ia testify. verifying the csur- 1T action ~
oath II the r-ctiun hAd omitted i,.i,i.
"ncr tn prnmaSory n"i"n. etc thlH ruu
trntnn would have controlling weight With
| me, tut for what SCENE To- l- Legislative
| INTERPRETATION. Ia the contrary By ~,
act II the Legislative ArH"mbly. 'ntItl''i,
"An act IN Irf.rrnr- IT, verified accounts. 4"
uass,i February :. 1889, II ~ provided
,h., verified acruun y shsll h- hl,-i nj
the commencement II TIE action, tut may
b- died later hy p-rsiiS1inn IL the court
that drfrndsn, shall hl- his d.nlal under
oath when he hl-p nir answer, unless IL,
court gives pernSrrlnn tu tile the rAm.
,ft-rw Aris.
|, IN Ia b- observed, that while s-ciinu
1876 pruvid-s fer suits On verified ~.
counts and for dsliAls under cath. II TAIL,
Ia urISid- for the time IL lr,'s- niiug
either, end that the act IT lSSg IN ~ r..
-rrncr tn these otnir-iunr ami nothing
-laa, and shows tat the denial under a-c.
ton 1878 was 4 b- hl.-d IN the cause
| think. therefor, that constituting Hc,-
tinn 1878 and the oct 1T 1859 IN par mA
iprIA, the denial uulrr oath required 10y
that section mrani AN oath IN writing.
AMI that it, purpose In Ia prevent - de
faul, Conc-d,ng, for the cake ii the ar
guinent, that the SncluSinn s'ovr u far
~ drawn, II in further urg-,i that chapter
- II the acts v ls's, ,ntitl~d IAN act re-.
ls,irg L. pr,crAings N civil cAs-n'
hnws Legislative unHtructi"n exactly the
reverse THIS At became - law on the
same day a. ih,Hct relating Ia verified
accounts, supra. AMI " 1t II Legislative
construction ru0 A. the defendants
CLAIM, the two alta seem Ia me 4" l,- ~
,ilr-rt "ps,rltioI II II certainly the
ras- as Ia vrri'- scrounts that defend
ante must Tile, prr IT, trial, y denial uu-
der osih. and ,ha~ tan i- nn gp-i r-a.
-,u why Diet ulS ,hould lr- ohtainahl.. ~
them for wan, VI written drnIal ~ ar Ia
trial and not IN 'ui'S brought upon prom.
lsnry notes All other Instrument III
"rn'nR' e-ls''his WV" y, re'''" 900
- s"h '"e ~ Ns,'s !" l'rTe"'''"sH
:" eNh e"s'r' ~ nrr p'A.ri vi 'ne r"h'
nS"hR c",'.,"'.n'" '"a' "AI,h'"'h'S
ne -r.a,'n shu W. wv" CTS ,s 'hn' 'h'
"hnAvn pr"N''' n'r III lhr ACT 'r'".i"s
" irSr~'lnES q ''''' I"s-H may !" h''''
An' 'ne cAure 'Nahc''i u "" '""n'eT M
hhav" 70 ni, NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. 'h.t
written nrn'Ailnn-r c''"h 1873 ~ hlri
~ WIN I've SEN mat the "n'y written dr
h'hI "nen WI Surn'r nnurr 'hAt act ~
thar Whmh sh'~s mat defendant mas luIly
explained Ills '-snr- ." ma attorney. etc I,
'hing quite q hrrrnt from the denial
w Nmed by ne other act and section
1878 b. -kr'nc" Of the DENIAL under
section 1878 itrrf-r-r IN NJ way, IN my
opinion, with rr-art to the act for advance
m-n' of causes
IL was conceded in the argument. that
II d-frndAntH cm,ention about the Pur
I"s- 81 section lSS Ia true, refrrrnc- Ia
prhrniss"ry noi-s aud other instruments
IN writing th-rin, In wholly useless
Statutes should ~ construed. however.
81 rs 10 make Zach aud every hart Fl
feet, and this the construction cont-n,I~d
tor by plaintiff certainly accomplished
The fact that the denial may be made by
the agent Of the defendant as we'll as by
the defendant himself. lends all To the