The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1872-01-18
An Eminent Expert.

VI late years d new anu CURIOUS PROFESSION
has come into vogue. We allude to that Of
'tcxperts" in handwriting. These gentle
mems services have for some time been re.
peatedly called in requestin England, especi-
ally in disputed will clses, but they seldom
made much impession either on Judge or
Jury until there arose master IN the craft,
Mr.. Chabot It was through case which
occurred few years! since in the London
Probate Court that this gentleman was
brought into the first rank Of his very limit
ed profession, of which Mr.. Netherclift had
up to that time been the chief. Thegrouud
of dispute was in relation to the will Of q
wealthy old yeoman One side claimed that
The will was genuine, the other that it was q
forgery. When the turn came for Mr.. Cha
bots evidence to be given, the counsel for
tie Vill give contemptuous smilo as theex-
pert ascended the box, and my lord leaned
back in his chair in manner which indicated
"know how much this sort Of testimony is
worth" Bydegrees, however, matters under
went a change. Counsel against the will
became particularly assured in his bearing.
Counsel for the will fidgcted in his seat, and,
what was more important, my lord aroused
himself and began to take notes. When Mr..
Chabot descended from the witness-box he
had broken the will. The Judge, in sum-
ming up, said that he must confess that pre-
vious experience had not disposed him to
place much reliance on testimony Of this des-
cription, but the present case was an excep-
ton. Mr.. Chabot's evidence was certainly
most remarkable. The point to which this
accomplished gentleman drew special atten-
tion was the fact that he had examined page
after page of writing which was admitted by
either side to be that of the deceased, and in
no case had he found the vowel 20" connect
ed with the other letters in the word in which
it occurred; whereas in the document alleged
to be forged 20" sometimes stood alone,
sometimes was Joined on the the ncighboring
letters.
Mr.. Chabot's services arc nowin constant
demand 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 employ
ed in two notable suits. One ofthese-"Fire-
brace Us. Firebracc and other" lis divorce
case. A maid. servant, as often happens in
in such suits, is a prominent witness. She,
it appears, kept diary, in which she record
ed suspicious circumstances in her mlstresss
conduct. This diary the mistress got hold
of, and, the servant alleges, interpolated
passages 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 in the
handwriting of the servant: q,
The other case was one Of libel, an which
q lady named Dilks was plaintiff and MIR.
Shepard defendant. In Janufy, 1870, a Mr..
Birket, to whose son the plaintiff was engag-
ed, received letter imputing to her improper
conduct. On the 18th of FEBRUARY, Valen.
tines day, plaintiff herself received two let
ters. one containing some indecent vcr-es
and the other some lines from Chauccr.
The expert differed stronglyin 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 It content merely to state that he was Of
such and such an opinion. The jury found
for the defendant. Mr.. Chatot lately brought
his ingenuity to bear upon the vexed ques-
tion of Junius, and has helped to strengthen
the already overwhelming evidence in favor
of Sir Philip Francis's authorship of the fa-
nous letters .-MeO Torh Times,