The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1867-11-02
An Extraordinary VIII Case.

he amount involved exceeds <l~-tnb 100 The
arguments IN the a--before the United State
Circuit Court. Justice Clifford pr=iiing-eom-
mcTcei last Friday. III a suit 81 equity. hrOGght
by Hrtty H.. RJjiu-Jn against Thomas Maudcll
and Otle--. Nis Robinson (now Ms. Green)
wa-, p~TryiJU- % Der marriage, ono % the richest,
Il uJt tie richest. spin-ter IN tie United >uites;
her property. which sic inherited from her father.
wa commonly reIUted - be worth >. 600 eco.
Il apTear- that Ter aunt. Mis- sylvia Ann How
hand. who died lSOj, left a viii bearing date
Sept. 1858, and = cpdicil executed III lSb4. By
tLi- viii and codicil Miss Rowland disposed Of
about 100000 in private legacies. the largest. Of
$4,000. 10 Thomas Nandell, her lawyer, We
believe SIS 600 l. her physician. DR.. Gordon.
and from $1,000 % SIS. 900 10 each person in her
employment Sc LETT. also, S34O,OUu for public
charitable p~urI.ses. of which the city Of New
Bedford. where she resided. was 10 receive SOD
200. The residue of her estate, amounting. II l.
said. % about q million. Was 70 be placed III trust,
the income % be Paid 70 Miss Robinson during
her life; the principal. on her decease, 10 % 10
some of the teStatOr's relatives. Mis- Robinson
contests her aunt's will. This l., in it-elf,
remarkable enough, seeing that the young lady,
already the po>ses>Or Of millions. l. entitled under
IL, u an annuity that would add some SJU,OOO or
$4,000 20 her annual income. What she con-
tends FOR i the whole of Ecr aunts estate, in fee,
supposed 70 be worth about -, 900 900.
The ground upon which che contests the viii
and cyticil i noteworthy. IL seems that Miss
Rowland had quarreled with her brOther-in-law.
the father Of Miss Robinson, and being resolved,
If possible, 10 exclude him from all STARE, not only
Of her own property but Of his daughters also,
she PROPOSED. about sept. lSCO. 10 Ter niece, then
- ycaIs old, that if she (Aliss Rybinson) would
make a viii - that her father should inherit no
part of her property. she Miss HOwland) would,
in return, make a viii leaving everything 70 her
niece: the viii Of each To be deposited with the
other. and neither 70 make any other will without
notice . the other, and returning that other her
viii. Miss Robinson agreed % this, and the wills
were executed accordingly. But the subsequent
viii and cOdicil made by the aunt in lS63 and "a
were executed without notice to the niece. Thus
arJ-c "a question of law a novel question III the
courts Of this country. namely, whether a contract
for mutual wills. if proved, can he enforced, a.
being without consideration, and against public
policy and good mOruls.
But the most singular feature in this case still
remains 10 be stated. To the will originally made
by Miss Rowland ia favor Of her niece'there Is an
addition, scwed on with fine thread to the first
lagc, not changing any provision of the VIII, buta
sort Of protest by the testatOr against tie validity
Of any Subsequent will which she under undue
influence from those around her, might be induced
u make. Part of the text Is: Il imIlOre the
Judge To decide in favor of this will, a. nothing
could induce me % make n will uniavoablc u my
niece; but being i'll, and afraid if any of my care
takers insisted ON my making n will t. refuse. as
they might leave Inc or be angry. / give this
will 10 my niece to show, II absolutely necessary
70 lave u AIfE1lT i-1tln-E lllOltltE VIII lDulu lie
my death" Miss Robinson tcstites under cath
that she wrote this apyendige u the Will At the
suggestion Of her aunt, and that her aunt signed
il IL duplicate IN her presence. The defense 10
this Is nothing less than a charge of forgery Ii
j. denied tlat the signature u this additional page
Is genuine. and alleged that it was copied by
tracing from a signature ~(admitted TO be genuine)
Of the ~tcstat1r 70 the original will 10 which this
aUTendagc l. fOund stitched. This opens up a
WIDE field, in which not only questions OF law bat
Of science and even OF art come Up. On the
question of forgery both PARTIES have spent much
time AMI labor. Two skiilful photographers have
been cmulDyed for weeks; and experts have
expended months in procuring and comparing in a
great number of cases. numerous signatures by
the same person, - a. 70 determine tie chances
that any Iersun should write three signatures
exactly alike. The testimony l. 20 the effect that
Miss Hovland's signature to the original and
genuine will, and the twDs ignaturcs to the appended
TaIer. executed in duplicate. are III every letter
and line and in the spaces between the three
words, Sylvia Ann Rowland, 80 precisely cOinci-
dent. - identical in fact, that nothing but a
deliberate PIrIo>e To- make them - can explain
the phenomenon. Mr.. Cr0ssman. for the defence.
t~e-iiies that he has spent nearly i've months in
many HUNDREDS Of signatures OF many
persons; comparing the coincidence
by ~uI eTimTISinE one On tie other ON "a glass IN
front Of = window. and also by tracing and
-uJcrimpJ-iEZ the jracings. He says there was
gre ter Similarity in Miss HOwlani's signatures.
40 or 80 Of which he compared with each other,
than in any other cazc. and he considers the two
signatures % the detached sheets - De genuine.
the other hanl. Mr.. SyuthwOrth, after similar
declares that the three Signatures coin
eide with a mathematical accuracy, not only
letter for letter and sIace tor space. but also that
each las the slant % the base line Of each paper,
=, that the eyes secs them IArcllel. lis testimony
covers 80 Iages, and he TrOnOunces the two con
tested signatures 10 be fDrgcrics executed 10y
tracing.
But the most curious and interesting tcstimo-
ny of the whole i that Of Prof. Benjamin Pierce
Of Harvard College, superintendent Of the
Coast Survey. and one Of the bcst mathematician
Of the agc. upon the doctrine Of chances. lie
aid: =. He had n large experience relating to the
e.muutatiOn of chances: that tic mathematical
discussion Of the subject Of coincidence of sigma
tures had never, % bis knowledge, been proposed,
that IL was not difficult, and a numerical cx-
preston applicable to this problem, the correct
mes Of which would lie recognized by all the math-
ematicians In tie world. could readily be obtain.
Then having G-ceriainel the relative fTeIuen-
~ Of coincidence by comparing numerous sigma
tur,- Of Miss Rowland 10 bills of -alc Il vessels,
etc. &c concludes that in her ease, 1.-the phenO-
menOu (Of cJincidence) could occur only once IN
two thousand six hundred and siXty-millions Of
If millions Of times, or 2.O66 900 900
OOO. OUO, 600 900 This number, the Professor
remarks, b. lar trlnsccnis human experience. ~
vast an imUrJbability j. practically AN impcssibi-
litv. Such cyanescent shadows OF impro6ability
belong u actual life. They are unimagi-
nably less than the least things which the law
care. not for" And his conclusion from these
data j. thus expressed: = Under q solemn sense of
the responsibility involved in the assertion, I de-
clare that the coincidence which has here occurred
must have had it, origin in an intention To pro.
duec it."
million of dollars has often been -taked on the
calculation Of chances but there j. not, in all pro-
liability. another example ON record in which the
a. :. - aM-- Hwva.Fu1rsar slws w-a.rv. 49,
liable O. b. determined By the testimony Of a
learned professor, following out the principles
Ia Places great work - ably set forth.
and apulying the unalterable rulc- Of mathemati-
- -. -