the affixing of Signatures by stamp and its legal validity
unless there is a statutory direction applying to the direction in which the signature is affixed.
There having been some murmur in which the signature is affected.
I don't know whether this wording is correct, if it does, I presume R.E. that it is not his own 'statutory direction' within the meaning of the signature. I ask him to send copies of stamped signatures to see if they correspond with the original.
It appears that the stamped signatures have been authenticated in the same hand-writing. Explain that we understand why the stamp is being used for this purpose, although there may be some objection to its admissibility in evidence due to the signature being stamped.
Reference is made to Section 7 of the Evidence Act 1851, which states that the seal of the Colony (and not the person's signature) is the thing that is being attested to - so far as evidence is concerned.
With regard to rubber-stamp signatures, we recently had a case referred to the L.O. in the Tuan case (I think) where Sir R. Solomon's signature was on a rubber stamp on a certificate of naturalization, and forgery was suspected, although it was ultimately deemed to be authentic.
The opportunity was taken to officially raise this issue in a despatch, although this obligation does not, of course, apply in this case.
I do not recall what the L.O. reported on the above case (or if I saw it at all), but in case it is relevant, reference is made to the L.O. The Tuan case is not directly in point.
The proposed amendment made by Collins was agreed upon by Stubbs on 29/12.
By the time this paper is finally dealt with, Sir W. Nathan will probably have done enough business to...
I think that this practice should be disallowed.
It is presumed that the use of rubber-stamp signatures has not been generally objected to by those who might be affected.
JAR, 26/12
I presume that the reason civil servants object to taking over the fund is due to misconceptions that have prevailed in other colonies, which have been answered by despatch 13916/137127 in the Straits.
Page 19
March 5 Dodd, with Sirk Winey firld, because under See 7 of the Evidence Act 1851...
...
Page 92
...
Bag/12 or at least not sanctioned at present, no reason is given why the...
XCR(85)72
GR1178/1922/32(III)
the affisting for Signatures by stamp and to legal
unless there way
a
statution direction
apply
כי-
t
the direction
the
Wir ha
tta
There having been
marmar in which the signature is the affected.
I don't know whether this werking lut, if it dows, I presume R.!. that it not hi 'his own
'statutom directin' wittin
to a the 2.0] £.0_]
signatur armantes the meaning y
? ask him & sent have copies of
ham her stamped sighakers
Athens which may their core
deney sent (no shees han- came
set)
the
Gotthe
anthenticated in this one hand-writing. Explain that. w- understand why the stamp is king used fo
дай ally object because other doubt as madumissibility in evidence of an the signatma stamped ]
offre inte
السلة
19
Mirath 5 Dodd, wit
184
rague with Sirk Winey firld, because unde See 7 of the Evidence Act 1851 the seal of the Colony, (and not the hour's signature I's the thring" - so far as evidence
"but be she comply with his lustinctives. Impur
to concerned
[with regard to rutterstock signatures, wo recently but
a cade
s case to the L.0...
in the Tuaal traning (think] Sir R-Solomon's signature
in rubber stamp
on it her suche
of a certificate of naturalizatio
for forgery bring untomnited, a shit I think bi inatuerith
an order proudded to i
← Count
}
the opportuniti
rubberstamp signature
lut
си
the case
officially in a desp. this olysation does not of course good.
how
I do not recollent what the 2.0. reported on the above
J
cave (of Irout saw the the front), but in case
M
M
مس
reference to the L..O., the Twant Who weed not to considered. As stated in
the
case
Soulf
? Proced
L
Wita
uny
Last
not directly in point.
proposed by me? Stubbs with the
amentment made by was Collins
JA
29/12
Sofrend bet de Wameon
She are the
Wie before
we
པ་
92
write
to the form. By the time this paper. is finally dealt with Sie on Nathan will perbathi
exogh
to do busines
AB
29/12
The well
Mw Cot
I think that this Orgue
be disallowed the
has better.
น
they rubber stamp
made any general obous
arquatures those pho might perhaps le
JAR. 26/12
3 presume
gila was
that
чт газета no sont oz.O.
+33482. I'veal.
Bag/12
or at least not sauctioned
reason
من
at present no
gwen why the
civil servants object to
Taking over
the fund
and
mofficials the fol
it is
no doubt due to the misconceptions which have prevailed in other colonies,
& which have been answered
by despatch
13916 137127
#SK
in Straits
The concessions
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.