Minderwiz
I did a check with Deb Houlding, who is an expert on Lilly. In one of her posts, she tackles this subject and comes to the conclusion that there are some examples which show that Lilly did treat completed past aspects as relevant in the description of past events, even if they occurred in the previous sign. There 's also an example of him using future aspects, to be encountered after a change in sign as part of his description of what lies ahead. There aren't that many but they exist.
She does say that :
'...that seems to suggest that Lilly was less likely to view sign boundaries as capable of fully terminating the effect of an aspectual contact, although it's clear that he regarded a change of sign as an indication of a major change in circumstances.'
But:
'I’m always wary of pulling up references from Lilly’s judgements as a means to prove technique though – it’s worth bearing in mind that what he does in the specifics of his interpretations sometimes only seems justified within the context of the chart he is working on, where he is guided by a wider set of influences.'
She does say that :
'...that seems to suggest that Lilly was less likely to view sign boundaries as capable of fully terminating the effect of an aspectual contact, although it's clear that he regarded a change of sign as an indication of a major change in circumstances.'
But:
'I’m always wary of pulling up references from Lilly’s judgements as a means to prove technique though – it’s worth bearing in mind that what he does in the specifics of his interpretations sometimes only seems justified within the context of the chart he is working on, where he is guided by a wider set of influences.'