Case Name: Thomas Jones's Administrators v. Joseph Blount's Executors
Court: North Carolina Superior Court
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1795-10
Citations: 1 Hayw. 272
Docket Number: 
Parties: Thomas Jones’s Administrators v. Joseph Blount’s Executors.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 272–273

Head Matter:
Thomas Jones’s Administrators v. Joseph Blount’s Executors.
When the subscribing witness to a bond is dead, and his handwriting cunncr be proved, proof of the handwriting of tho obligor may be received.
Debt upon a bond for five hundred and twenty-sis pounds. The Defendant pleaded a set off, and produced two old bonds, one dated in 1760, the other in 1768, both attested ; but the witness who attested one of them, was a lady who had lived some time ago in Edenton, and was now dead; and her handwriting could not be proved by any one that the Defendant could procure.
It was objected by Mr. Hamilton for the Plaintiff, that when the handwrifing.of a deceased witness cannot be proved, it is irregular to prove the handwriting of the ob - ligar himself, that being riot essential to the deed, and not amounting to any proof of the delivery of it.

Opinion:
Per curiam,
Williams and Haywood
The law only, requires the best evidence the party has in his power.'— The subscribing witness must be produced when there is one; if he. be dead, proof of his handwriting may be admitted ; and if the handwriting of the witness cannot be proven, then proof of the handwriting of the obligor may be received ; this affording a strong evidence that the ob-ligor meant to make himself chargeable by that signature. And the Defendant in the present case, was permitted to prove the handwriting of the obligor.
Note. Vide note to Clements & Co. v. Eason & Wright, ante 18.