The signatures of the witnesses need not be in any particular part of the will, if it appears that they were intended to attest the operative signature of the testator. In bonis Daris, 3 Curt. 748; In bonis Chamney, 1 Rob. 757; Roberts v. Phillips, 4 E. & B. 450; In bonis Wilson, 1 P. & D. 269; In bonis Pearse, 1 P. & D. 382; In bonis Braddock, 1 P. D. 433; In bonis Streatley, (1891) P. 172. Chap. IV. Position of signatures. must be con nected with will. But the signatures, if not on the same paper as the will, Signatures must be on a paper physically connected with it. In bonis West, 12 W. R. 89; In bonis Saunders, 31 L. J. P. 53; Cook v. Lambert, 32 L. J. P. 93; 3 Sw. & T. 46; In bonis Gausden, 2 Sw. & T. 362; In bonis M'Key, I. R. 11 Eq. 220; In bonis Braddock, 1 P. D. 433. Where the testator signs the will, and the witnesses sign a duplicate, the will is not sufficiently attested. In bonis Hatton, 6 P. D. 204. must attest The witnesses must attest the signature, which is intended Witnesses as an execution of the will; and where there are several signa- operative tures, the attestation of any but that intended as an execution signature. of the will is invalid to give effect to the will or any part of it. In bonis Martin, 6 N. of C. 694; 1 Rob. 712; Ewen v. Franklin, Deane, 7; 1 Jur. N. S. 1220; Sweetland v. Sweetland, 4 Sw. & T. 6; 34 L. J. P. 42; 13 W. R. 504; Phipps v. Hale, 3 P. & D. 166; In bonis Dilkes, 3 P. & D. 164. attest. The attesting witnesses must subscribe with the intention, Intention to that the subscriptions made should be a complete attestation of the will, and evidence is admissible to show whether such was the intention or not. In bonis Wilson, 1 P. & D. 269; In bonis Sharman, 1 P. & D. 661; Griffiths v. Griffiths, 2 P. & D. 300; In bonis Murphy, I. R. 8 Eq. 300. Adding an address to, or correcting a signature already made, or writing a christian name when the witness is unable to complete his signature, is insufficient. In bonis Trevanion, 2 Rob. 315; 14 Jur. 919; Hindmarsh v. Charlton, 1 Sw. & T. 433; 8 H. L. 160; In bonis Maddock, 3 P. & D. 169; M'Conville v. M'Creesh, 3 L. R. Ir. 73. So a witness writing the name of a second witness opposite the mark of the latter cannot be said to subscribe. In bonis Eynon, 3 P. & D. 92. Chap. IV. Form of signature. A signature made without any intention of attesting will be excluded from probate. In bonis Sharman, 1 P. & D. 661; In bonis Murphy, I. R. 8 Eq. 300; In bonis Smith, 15 P. D. 2. Witnesses need not sign by name; initials, or a description, or a mark, are sufficient. In bonis Christian, 2 Rob. 110; 7 N. of C. 265; In bonis Martin, 6 N. of C. 694; In bonis Sperling, 3 Sw. & T. 272; 12 W. R. 354; In bonis Amiss, 2 Rob. 116; In bonis Ashmore, 3 Curt. 756. But a seal is insufficient. In bonis Byrd, 3 Curt. 117. One witness cannot sign for another. In bonis White, 2 N. of C. 461; In bonis Middleton, 33 L. J. P. 16; Re Duggins, 39 L. J. P. 24. In bonis Cope, Nor can a third person sign for a witness. But a witness or a third person may guide the hand of the second witness, or may subscribe for the witness if the witness holds the top of the pen while the signature is being made. Harrison v. Elvin, 3 Q. B. 117; 2 G. & D. 769; In bonis Frith, 4 Jur. N. S. 288; 27 L. J. P. 6; In bonis Lewis, 31 L. J. P. 153; 7 Jur. N. S. 688; see In bonis Kilcher, 6 N. of C. 15. The papers found at the testator's death to compose his will must, in the absence of proof to the contrary, be presumed to be the will executed by him. Gregory v. Queen's Proctor, 4 N. of C. 620; Marsh v. Marsh, 1 Sw. & T. 528; Rees v. Rees, 3 P. & D. 84. CHAPTER V. ALTERATIONS, INTERLINEATIONS, AND ERASURES. Ir is immaterial that the will contains blank spaces or even a blank page. Corneby v. Gibbons, 1 Rob. 705; In bonis Rice, I. R. 5 Eq. 176; In bonis Wotton, 3 P. & D. 159. Oral and written declarations of a testator made before or after the execution of the will are admissible in evidence for the purpose of showing what were the constituent parts of the will at the time of execution. Gould v. Lakes, 6 P. D. 1. Chap. V. Blank spaces. when alterations made. Where a will contains obliterations, additions, or other altera- Evidence tions, evidence must, if possible, be produced to show when they were made. In bonis Hindmarch, 1 P. & D. 307; In bonis Duffy, I. R. 5 Eq. 506; Moore v. Moore, I. R. 6 Eq. 166; In bonis Tonge, 66 L. T. 60. For this purpose declarations of the testator with regard to his testamentary intentions made before the date of the will are admissible. Doe v. Palmer, 16 Q. B. 747; In bonis Sykes, 3 P. & D. 26; Dench v. Dench, 2 P. D. 60. The fact that a date earlier than the date of the will is annexed to alterations is not alone sufficient to show that they were made before execution. In bonis Adamson, 3 P. & D. 253. As to the proper inference where there is evidence that some at least of the alterations in a will were made before execution, see Williams v. Ashton, 1 J. & H. 115; Moore v. Moore, I. R. 6 Eq. 166; Doherty v. Dwyer, 25 L. R. Ir. 297. Alterations made in ink before execution will be presumed Presumption T.W. D as to alteration. Chap. V. Deliberative alterations. Presumption as to date of alteration. Alterations after date of will and before codicil. Wills Act, s. 21. to be final. Gann v. Gregory, 3 D. M. & G. 780; Ibbott v. Bell, Alterations made before execution in pencil, the will being written in ink, are prima facie deliberative, and the original writing will have effect. Hawkes v. Hawkes, 1 Hag. 322; Edward v. Astley, ib. 490; Ravenscroft v. Hunter, 2 ib. 68; Parkin v. Bainbridge, 3 Phillim. 321; Lavender v. Adams, 1 Add. 403; Bateman v. Pennington, 3 Moo. P. C. 223 ; Francis v. Grover, 5 Ha. 39; In bonis Hall, 2 P. & D. 256; In bonis Adams, ib. 367. See In bonis Bellamy, 14 W. R. 501. Alterations and additions made in a will complete without them must be presumed, in the absence of evidence, to have been made after the execution of the will or any subsequent codicil. Cooper v. Bockett, 4 N. of C. 685; 4 Moo. P. C. 419; Simmons v. Rudall, 1 S. N. S. 115; Greville v. Tylee, 7 Moo. P. C. 320; Gann v. Gregory, 3 D. M. & G. 780; Doe v. Palmer, 16 Q. B. 747; Williams v. Ashton, 1 J. & H. 115; Christmas v. Whinyates, 3 Sw. & T. 81; In bonis Sykes, 3 P. & D. 26. Alterations and additions made in a will which would be incomplete without them, must be presumed to have been made before execution. In bonis Cadge, 1 P. & D. 543; Birch v. Birch, 1 Rob. 675; 6 N. of C. 581; In bonis Swinden, 2 Rob. 192; Greville v. Tylee, 7 Moo. P. C. 320; In bonis Birt, 2 P. & D. 214; In bonis Adams, ib. 367; In bonis King, 23 W. R. 552. See, however, In bonis White, 30 L. J. P. 55. Interlineations and alterations made in a will which is afterwards confirmed by a codicil are admitted to probate if it appears from the codicil or otherwise that they were made before the execution of the codicil. Tyler v. Merchant Taylors', 15 P. D. 216; In bonis Heath, (1892) P. 253. The Wills Act (1 Vict. c. 26), sect. 21, enacts that no obliteration, interlineation, or other alteration made in any will after the execution thereof shall be valid or have any effect, except so far as the words or effect of the will before such alteration shall not be apparent, unless such alteration shall be executed in like manner as hereinbefore is required for the execution of the will; but the will, with such alteration as part thereof, shall be deemed to be duly executed if the signature of the testator and the subscription of the witnesses be made in the margin, or on some other part of the will opposite or near to such alteration, or at the foot or end of or opposite to a memorandum referring to such alteration, and written at the end or some other part of the will. An alteration opposite which the testator and two witnesses have set their initials in the margin is sufficiently executed under this section. In bonis Blewitt, 49 L. J. P. 31; 5 P. D. 116; see, too, In bonis Treeby, 3 P. & D. 242; In bonis Shearn, 50 L. J. P. 15. A sentence commenced on the second page and carried over to the third was admitted to probate, though the testator and witnesses had initialled only the second page. In bonis Wilkinson, 6 P. D. 100. Chap. V. Where the original is completely obliterated and not Obliteration ascertainable, the will must be considered blank, so far as the complete. obliteration, interlineation or other alteration is concerned. In bonis Ibbetson, 2 Curt. 337; Townley v. Watson, 3 Curt. 761; In bonis James, 1 Sw. & T. 238; Doherty v. Dwyer, 25 L. R. Ir. 297. The Court will only endeavour to discover the original by the use of glasses or similar means, and not by the use of chemicals, or removal of any substance from the will. In bonis Bearan, 2 Curt. 369; In bonis Horsford, 3 P. & D. 211; In re Nelson, I. R. 6 Eq. 569; In bonis Brasier, 1899) P. 36. See Lushington v. Onslow, 6 N. of C. 183; Ffinch v. Combe, (1894) P. 191. But where a testatrix wrote something on the back of a codicil and subsequently pasted a piece of blank paper over the writing, it was held that the paper might be removed. In bonis Gilbert, (1893) P. 183. It appears to be clear that no external evidence would be admitted to show what the original words were, except in a case of dependent relative revocation (see post, p. 41). In bonis |