Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1872-01-05
THE GAZETTE.
FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 5.
An Eminent Expert.

0cl,,e years a new and curious profession
has come into vogue We allude to that OF
.seSnerts' in handwriting. These gentlemen,
services have for some time been repeatedly
called in request in England, especially IN dis
puted will cases, but they seldom made much
impression either GU Judge or jury until there
arose master in the craft, Mr.. Chabot. 1t
Was through case which occurred few years
since in the London Probate Court that tins
gentleman was brought into the first rauS OF
his very limited profession, OF when MI
Eetberclift had up to that time been the chiet
The rround of dispute was IN relation to the
will Of wealthy old ycoman. One side claimed
that the will was genuine, the other that 1t was
a forgery. When the turn catrc for Mr.. Cha
bot evidence to be given, the counsel Tor the
will give a contemptuouS smile as the expert
assembled the box, and my lord leaned back IN
his chair in manner which indicated L know
how much this sort Of testimony Is worth
By degrees, however, matters underwent a
change Counsel against the will became par
ticularly assured in his bearing. Counsel for
the will fdgeted in his seat, and, what was
more important, my lord aroused himself and
began to take notes. When Mr.. Chabot dc
secluded from the witness-box he had broken
the will The judge, in summing up, SAID
that he must confess that previous experience
had not disposed him to place much reliance
on testimony of this description, but the pres
ent case was an execution. Mr. Chabut' evil
dence was certainly most remar kabc. The
point to which this accomplished gentleman
drew special attention was the tacS that he had
examined page after page OF writing which
was admitted bv either side to be that OF the
deceased, and in no case had he found the
vowel so connected with the other letters IN
the word in which it occurred; whereas IN the
document alleged TO be forged % sometimes
stood alone, sometimes was joined on to the
neighboring letters.
Mr. Chabot'S services arc now IN constant de-
mand, and he ought to be making very large
income. The Tichborne case must alone have
put great many pounds in his pocket. Quite
recently he has been employed in two notable
suits. One of thesc-"Firebrace VS.. Flrcbracc
and others is divorce case. \ mald-se
want, as often happens in such suits, is prom
iuent witness. She, it appears, kept diary, in
which she recorded suspicious circumstances IN
her mistress conduct. This diary the mistress
got hold of, and, the servant alleges, iutcrpoat-
ed passages which reflect sadly on the morality
of the servant herself, and are thus calculated
to weaken the effect of her evidence against
Mrs Firebracc. Mr.. Chabot is of opinion that
the alleged interpretations arc not in the hand
writing of the servant.
The other case was one of libel, in which a
lady named Dilks was plaintiff and Mr.. Shep-
herd defendant. In January, 1870, Mr.. Biz
ket, to whose son the plaintiff was engaged, re-
ceived letter imputiug to her improper con
duct. On the l4th of February, Valentine 5
day, plaintiff herself received two letters, one
containing some indecent verses and the other
some lines from Chaucer The experts differed
strongly in regard to the similarity of the writ
ing with that of Mr. Shepherd. In summing
up, the Lord Chief Justice pointed out that the
great merit of Mr. Chabot in such cases was
that he gave cogent reasons for his coucu sions
and was not content merely to state that he was
of such and such an opinion The Jury found
for the defendant. Mr.. Chabot lately brought
his ingenuity to bear upon the vexed question
of Junius, and has helped to strengthen the al
ready overwhelming evidence in favor Of Sir
Philip Francis,s authorship of the famous let
ters-N Y Tines