Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1872-12-26
: 7AUTOGRAPHY.
Can the Character of n MAN be De.
I termfned by His Handw rtttng.

Thirty years ago Edgar A. Poe pub
lished in Graham's Magazine series Of
Papers on Autography" in which he
maintained, with his usual brilliant
originality, that the character of mar
could be determined by his handwriting.
To establish his theory, fac-similios oi
the autographs Of more than one hun.
dred American authors were given; and
the conclusions he deducted were con.
vincing, II not in all cases correct. Ny
friend, Mrs. Anne Crane Seemuller, the
author of Emily Chester" "Oppor'
tunity," etc., is firm believer in the
affinity existing between character and
handwriting. She possessed the gift OF
being able to read a persons character
by his handwriting. This power l have
often tested by showing her the writing
of people she did not know, and asking
her to give me description Of them from
their chirography. She never failed in
single instance in furnishing per-
fectly correct description Of their char
acter.
Chesterfield, whose handwriting dis
plays that graceful elegance we might
expect to find in the most polished gen.
tlemen of the eighteenth century, de-
clared that every man who has the use
of his eyes and his right hand can write
whatever hand he pleases." This is 60
ing o little too far. If Byron, who had
the use of his eyes and his right hand
could have written whatever hand he
pleased, ? is il natural to suppose that he
would have written his wretched school
boy scrawl or would Macsulay have
written his sprawling hand2 or would
Napoleon /. have written the worst hand
on record-so that his letters to Jose
phine from Germany were sometimes
mistaken for MAYS of the seat of war;
They had not the sarne reason for writ
ing badly as that given by a college
student to his guardian, when reproved
for his chirography. 1T is all very well
to write better, said the young man,
who found more pleasure in using his
hand in base ball than in writing, but
ifI were to write better, people would
find out how l spell. "
There are national peculiarities Of
handwriting, as there are national pecu-
liarities of physiognomy. The vivacity
OF the Frenchman, the delicacy of the
Italian, and the pride of the Spaniard,
are as perceptibls in their handwriting
as the slowness of the phlegmatic Ger
man and the reserve of the Englishmsn
in theirs SO true is this, that it has
been observed of English boys educated
in France that they naturally cling to
the English manner of writing. The
Americans, being made up from all the
peculiarity of handwriting.
Not to be able to write at all was once
the boast of knights and gentlemen
From the original Magma Charter, which
is preserved 10 the British Museum, it
would appear that neither King John
nor any of bis mobiles could sign their
own pames. Indeed, ut much later
period in England it was considered the
sign of gentleman to write a bad hand.
This absurd notion, however, only pre-
vailed among the silly court-fops and
"curled darlings of fashion" The states
men of England have generally written
excellen, hauds-Cannings's was -ex.
ouisite;. the Duke of Wellington's clear
aud noble; Sir Robert Peel's was very
legible, but too mercantile for beauty;
Lord Derby wrote q beautiful hand;
Lord Palmerstons handwriting was a
model of penmanship; Earl Russell
writes very fine; William Pitt wrote
very flowing hand; Mr.. Gladstone writes
a beautifully neat and regular hand.
While Queen Elizabeth was Princess
she wrote a beautiful hand, clear and
regular. After she had been Queen
some time, a melancholy change took
place. TIE Letters became thin and
spitefnl, the lines irregulsr-an ugly,
old maids version Of her former
hand Mary, Queen Of Scots, wrote
fne, graceful hand, indicating sweetness
and nobility. Any one looking at the
writing Of these two Queens would very
readily know which belonged to the
cruel Elizabeth, and which TO the gentle
Mary. Queen Victorias signature is
beautifully formed, with each letter
clearly cut. in marked contrast are the
signatures of the three Napoleons. The
first wrote q mere scravl, no letters
formed, no words completely written ont;
the second wrote fair, large, handsome
hand; while the third Napoleon writes
neat, running, easy and very legible
hand. Cromwell wrote large, bold and
steady hand. George Nv wrote q mag
sweeping hand. George VII
wrote a strong, bold and determined
hand, while that Of Charles II was q
running serawl.
The poets have generally written char
acteristic hands. Gray wrote with elab-
crate neatness and regularity; Leigh
Hunt, with the utmost grace aad heaaty;;
Rogers, who corrected his verses natil
the polish nearly wore out the thought,