of it, and it is therefore the fame as if no, evidence at all - were pro--
duced *.
muftWp"rffeS <r?ncnrrence of the witneffes, in words and meaning, is refcaiy
agree quifite, according to Haneefa.— If, therefore, one witnefs bear tefti-
monyT '* * mony to °ne thoufand dirms being due, and the other to two thon-
ftnd, no credit is, to be given to either.— The two difcipl.es are .of
opinion that the evidence is to be credited to the amount of one thoufand
dirms i and a fimilar difagreement alfo fubfifts in a cafe where onewitnels.
attefts one divorce, and the other two. or three-divorces Thearguments
of the two- difciples are that the witneffes agree in the-
fmaltefi amount, (fuch as, in one thoufand dirms, or in one divorce ;).
and one of them, betides his agreement in this amount, attefts an additional
quantity.— Their evidence, therefore, mutt be admitted in.
the degree in which they concur ; and the teftimony of one, fo far as.
it relates to, the excefs only, mutt be rejected.— T h e reatoning o{ Haneefa
is that the witneffes differ in words, and confequently in meanings
fince meaning is extracted from words. Thus two thoufand (for
inftance) can never be conftrued to mean one thoufand, as the terms
are effentiaily diffèrent.— In the cafe in queffion, therefore, the ones
thotifand, and the two thoufand, refpeâively, are attefted by only one
witnefs ; and the cafe is confequently the, fame as if their teftimony had:
related to different articles,— as if one were to atteft dirms, and the
other deenars, for inftance.
sray'be'cre'-3 a Perf°n claim a debt of one thoufand five hundred dirms, and
dited to the one of his witneffes bear teftimony to one thoufand, and the other to
one thoufand five hundred, in that cafe the teftimony muft be credited
* T o exemplify this cafe,—-fuppofe a perfon were to claim the right o f property in a
houfe, on the plea o f his having purchafed i t ; and his witnefs atteft the right o f property
from its having been given to him;-—in that cafe the evidence fo given would be
rejected.
in
in the amount of one thoufand dirms*-, for the witneffes concur in
that amount, both in words and meaning, as one thoufand is
mentioned by both, and five hundred is an additional part of the fpeech,
which adds force to the former part, inftead of deftroying it.— Analogous
to this is one divorce and one divorce and an half; or one hundred
dirms and one hundred and fifty dirms-, that is to fay, in both
thefe cafes the evidence is admitted in the leaf! degree, namely, in
the de°ree of one divorce, and to the amount of one hundred
It would be otherwife if one witnefs fhould atteft ten dirms, and
the other fifteen; becaufe this is fimilar to the' atteftation of one
thoufand and two thoufand, the effeft of which has been before
ftated.
In a cafe where one witnefs attefts one thoufand dirms, and the
other one thoufand five hundred, and the claimant exprefsly declares
that only one thoufand dirms is due to him, the teftimony for one
thoufand five hundred is null, as being falfified by the claimant f .—
The. efteft is alfo the fame where the claimant alleges one thoufand
dirms, and one of the witneffes attefts one thoufand, and the other
one thoufand five hundred; for here alfo the claimant falfifies the
teftimony of one of his witneffes, inafmuch as his claim is different
from it. A conformity, therefore, between the claim and the evidence
is indifpenfably neceffary: and hence, if the claimant fhould
fay “ my original claim was one thoufand five hundred dirms, but I
“ received five hundred,” or “ I exempted the debtor from five
* T h e difference between this and the preceding cafe turns entirely on the terms in
%rhich- the teftimony is delivered ; for in the cafe here confidered the witnefs, in mentioning
one thoufand five hundred, mentions the term One thoufand\ which fo far coincides with
the teftimony o f the other witneffes;— whereas, in the former inftance, the witneffes coincide
only in the term thoufandy which is not perfe&ly definite.
f Confequently the claimant muft produce another witnefs, as iwo are required to
eftablifh his claim.
4 U 2 Ci hundred;’*
amount in
which they
agree both in
1words and
meaning-
The evidence
of a witnefs
who attefts a
larger fum
than the
claim a-
mounts to is
null.