Pannill v. Eliason & Brown

But the Court (ThRüston, J., absent,) overruled the objection, and suffered the deposition to be read.

The defendants’ counsel then contended that'the witness was not competent to prove his own authority to sign receipts for wheat delivered by the plaintiff to the defendants. 1 Phil, on Ev. 95; 4 Starkie on Ev. 55, 1730.

But the Court, (nem. con.) upon the authority cited in Paley on Agency, 245, said he was competent.