>When 'per' precedes a signature on such a document, does it mean that what
>follows is the person's actual signature?
I think that "per" followed by a signature is probably the same as "per
et pro" which is abbreviated to "pp". The way this should be used is
that if I have written a document and my secretary, Angela Johnson,
signs it for me, what appears (all written in Angela's hand) is: "Frank
A Sharman pp Angela Johnson".
That means that what follows the "per" ought not to be written in the
hand of the named signatory. But unfortunately no body seems to know or
follow the rule and most people seem to have it the wrong way round. It
is therefore no test at all of whose hand the name or names are written
in. (Come to that I can give no authority for my version of how it
should be but it seems to follow from the meaning of the words and
anyway I have been a lawyer for decades now, and therefore know
everything worth knowing).
"per" or "pp" or whatever are not strictly necessary. In law your
signature authenticating a document can be written by you or by anyone
else you authorise to do it. Adding the name of the amanuensis merely
helps to dispel any doubts the recipient may have about why the
signature looks unusual.
In modern business practice signing letters "pp" means that the sender
is far too busy and important to bother personally with the likes of the
recipient.
--
Frank Sharman
Wolverhampton, UK.
tel: +44 01902 763246
look: no quotes, no graphics!
|