The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1872-01-04
An Eminent Export.

OF late years new and curious profession
has come into vogue. We allude to that of
"cXpcrts" in handwriting. These gentle
mems services have for some time been re-
pcatediy called in request in England, cSpe-
cially in disputed will cases, but they seldom
made much impression either Oh judge or
Jury until there arose a master in the craft,
Mr.. Chabot. 1t was through case which
occurred Il few years Siuce in the London
Probate Court that this gentleman was
brought into the first rank of his very limited
profession, Of which Mr.. Netherclift had
up to that time been the chief. The ground
Of dispute was i'll relation to the Will OF
wealthy old yeoman. One side claimed that
the will was genuine, the other that it was a
forgery. When the tllln came for 9lr. Cha
bots evidence to be given, the counsel for
the will give contemptuous smile as the
expert assembled the box, and my lord leaned
back in his chair in manner which indi-
Gated 8. l know how much this sort of testi-
mony is worth" BY degrees, however, matters
underwent Il change. Counsel against the
will became particularly assured in his bear
ing. Counsel for the will fidgeted in his seat,
and, what was more impol tant, my lord
aroused himself and began TO take notes.
When Mr.. Chabot descended from the wit
ness-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 Oh testimony Of
this description, but the present case was an
execution. Mr.. Chabot's evidence was GER
tainly most remarkable. The point to which
this accomplished gentleman drew special ut
tenton was the fact that he had examined
page after page Of writing which was ad-
mitted by either side tobe that OF the de
ceased, 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 so"
sometimes stood alone, sometimes was joined
on to the neighboring letters.
Mr., Cnabot'S services are now in constant
delnnd, and be ought to be making very
large income The Tichborne case must
alone have put great many pounds III his
pocket. Quite recently he has been employed
in two notable suits. One of these" Fire
brace Is. FirebIGce and others lis divorce
case. A maid-serYant, as often happens IN
such suits, is q prominent witness. She, 1t
appears, kept diary, in which she recorded
suspicious circumstances in her mlstreSss
conduct. This diary the mistress got hold
of, and, the servant alleges, interpolated pas.
sases which reflect sadly on the morality OF
the servant herself, and are thus calculated
to weaken the effect of her evidence against
Mrs. Firebrace. Mr.. Chabot Is Of opinion
that the alleged interpretations are not i'll the
handwriting Of the servant.
The other case was one Of libel, IN which
a lady named DiIks was plaintiff and Mr..
Shepherd defendant. In January, 1870,
Mr.. Birket, to whose son the plaintiff was
engaged, received letter imputing to her
IMPROPER conduct. On the 14th of February,
Valentines 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 writing 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 conclusions, and was
not content merely to state that ne was OF
such and such an opinion. The jury found
FOR the defendant. Mr. Chabot lately brought
Ills ingenuity to bear upon the vexed cues
ton of Junius, and has helped to strengthen
the already overwhelming evidence in favor
of Sir Philip Francis's authorship OF the 10
nous letters NeD York Times. s. -