Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1849-1856, 1850-04-04

and it now turns out that they were
designed for different parts of the
building.
/. 1t seems to me that it is entirely ad-
missible, os forming part of the res
| gestG, upon the ground that anything
that DIR. Webster has said, is proper
for the consideration Of the jury. The
court ruled in the testimony after
brief consultation upon the bench.
| WEDNESDAY, March 9th.
The jury entered at o'clock precisely
but the Court being engaged in consu,a.
ton upon the nature Of the evidence To bo
adduced to support the allegation against
the prisoner of being the writer Of the let
ters sent through the post Office to Marshal
Tukey did not enter until minutes be-
fore 10 o'clock. The names of the Jury
were called and the proceedings con men
ced
6lst witness-NATHAsIEL Il. GOULD
called. Am not personally acquainted with
the defendant, but know him by sight, Lave
never see him write, but have seen writing
supposed to have been his have seen his
signature on diplomas, as Professor of
II Chemistry have always paid much aiten-
ton to permanship, from my youth have
taught it and written book on the subject.
II (lIere the letters sent to Marshal Tukcy
were produce and exhibited to the witness
as an adept. To this T. stmony the defence
urged very strong objections, on the ground
that Tho law had always designated su,h
evidence as lrcak, and that too when The
| genuine handwriting Of a pcIson was eX-
hlblte and acknowledged, in order to test
its resemblance to certain other forged wr-
tings Of the same person. The counsel for
the defence contendcd that such testimony
did not come within the principles of the
! law as laid down in The case of Wood VS..
rollins.
Il The Attorney General con,endcd on
intended to introduce into the case was
strictly in accordance with the principles
of Ia and rccogn zed in late case in
Eng land, and reported by "ESpnosc" that
the same principles had been admitted
the late case Of George Miller for forgery.
II Judge Merrick, senior counsel for de-
fence, contcnded on the other side, that the
case, quo'ed differed from the present one,
inasmuch as the attempt was made to com
pare the handwriting supposed to be Prof.
Webstcrs.
Il The Attorney General remarked that he
thought the counsel for the defence urged
their oh beclons AGAINST one letter only /;
that le,tcr was one which the government
would prove what any one could sec at
once, that it was not written bya pen, but
by an instrumep, which would be produced, +,
Il (alluding TO the pen made OF a reed, and
picked up in the Laboratory by Litlledcd)
The Court ruled tia, the evidence was
consistent as contenicd by the Government.
II Examination Of Mr.. G0uH resumed -
From my knowledge Of the handwriting of
II Professor Webster, should think the let
ter signed Girls dated November 2ist and
post marked Nov. 30h, (Which is now ox-
hibited) WIS his. (The witness stated
that he didn't know as he should be al
lowed to state the entire ground which he
should take in explaining Why he thought
the handwriting OF the Girls letter was
that of Prof. Webster. The defence con-
tended that the evidence to be gwen by the
witness was incompetent, but the court
ruled that tho testimony was competent,
and witness proceeded have not yet
satisfied myself, in long series of years
of teaching, tha, person can mike TWO
letters Of the same kind exactly alike and
have been accustomed to seeing different
hands written individually by many per
sons, yet there is always similarity IN
certain letters, which enables me 10 recog-
Mise at once who wruc them in this let
ter (the ciris letter) find that the letters,
(smalD and (small) ae made entirely
different frcm those made by Prof. w obster
: in his ordinary hand writing the character
e. WAS also used instead OF the word mi ;
= the res, of the letter does not differ cssenti-
ally frsm his common hand. THIS was
objected to by the defence on the ground
: that the witness had seen only the sigma
, ture of Prof W he could not tel what
the common writing Of the defendant was.
Here the government counsel exhibited to
the witness several papers containing Tho
hand writing known and acknowledged to
be that of Prof. Webster.
: Examination rcsumcd-l observe
: similarity Ito Prof W.'s handwri,i1e) II
. the capital letter |, which can hardly b'
). mistaken. The large letters, J.. ID, are
, also male like thosc-thc lcttcrs and docu
ments of Prof. Webster. The figures l. y
-, 4, G; the letter f. small and The word
. November. from, Boston, and several 9th
ors are exactly alkc--thc Gr'' letter.
d have perfect confidence in the judgmcn
:. formed in my own mind that this " Gn
.N.HN