Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1880-10-30
THE CHINESE LETTER FORG
ERY,

supreme tOuIb hCAC |
wss large crowd of spect Ators present. |
The envelope in which Morey's letter |
WAS contained wes handed to Judge |
Davis. and on motion Of the counsel |
Mr.. Hart was declared purged of con-
tempt. 1
Assistant District Attorney Bell
called Albert s. Southworth to the |
stand. He testified that he was an
expert In handwriting Of fifteen years
ex Experience; he had compared the
Photographic and interchangeable
copy of the Morey letter with the
Rock well and. Jewell letters and did
not think they were in the same hand
writing; slso had compared the
Morey letter with the exhibits
marked A, B, @, D, etc, the
exhibits on which the warrant of ar
rest was obtained, and found a
sufficiency of characteristics to enable
him to form an opinion that they were
in the same Handwriting. In reply to
question of Bell, after the interrc-
gazing had been changed to meet the
| object on Of the defense, witness said:
my beat judgment is that the hands
wiring in the Morey letter and in ex-
bib t. from A to K is the same"
Cross-examined-Witless had come
from Boston on the telegraphic re.
quest Of Marshall Jewell; expected pay
for his SERVICE; made affidavit at the
request of Messrs. StoughtOn, Knox
and Davenport; gave before
them a synopsis Of what he would
testify to; never saw the original
| Morey letter this mOrnin was ex-
amined as witness In the Whitaker
case; have known Mr.. Ames, the
expert examined yesterday, several
years, and did not receive any COM
munication from him in regard to this
matter. In the Whitaker Case he did
not t-stify or Il ate in conversation that
it was impossible to give any Judgment
in phot .reprt Gen ntatiOns of hand
Writiug. In the HI 5drs will case h g
also t-stifie as an expert; did not know
t1at tnaG case was deciued against his
testimony. In the Taylor will case,
he lestIfied that the signature to the
will was not James b. Taylor's
signature; did not know Gen. Gar
fi1ld; did not know for whom he
would vote; may not vCts again.
The prosecution next called VIM.
E. Hogan, of Troy, al expert in hand
wIiIug. rhe witness had examined
NJ 1rey's kt.sr and the photo
Mt 4Ographlc copies Of it together with
| Lu0 "A w AI CahO hAo OPaAAOA
Was, that the person who wrote ihe
exhibit, wrot, Morey's letter. Morey's
letter " as eVn1enLly The writing of the
} person Initiating anOthers landWrlt
ing, lit Oducing, however, strong
charaC terIstics of mis- own. In the ex-
nibIt A In the signature OF Kenward
Pnllp's K, is exactly similar TO the K
In "kept" in Morey's letter. The WIT.
ness found other similarit .es in the lets
ters. He had examined the phot 1-litho.
graphic copies of the exhibits Nos. and
2, and the originals there of Rock we'll
and Jewell let er and he declared they
We're not iu the same handwriting.
Cross-examlnatiOn by Brook
Received q telegram from Governor
Jewell yesterday t. come here and ex-
pee, ed t. be paid; did not know Gen.
pGarfelu; Was not interested in him
any further than to give him his vOte.
, Witness was then sworn by Mr.
, Stoughton for the prosecution. The
envelope was produced thus morning,
and was asked IT there mad been any
erasure on the stamp, and he answered
in the affirmative. Continuing, he
t said there Is an erasure on the stamp
D III the dste of the month. l can not
say what toe original date was; the in
uIcaClOus are that the date and month
have been erased by rubbing on tue
back of the envelope. On the stamp
= and date there are indications OF era
I sure. The dat aud monto cannot be
decIphered. There are three stamps
on lne envelope, in which no dates
can be made out; all dates seemingly
being erased. SouthwOrth was taen
recalled by Mr.. Stoughtou. He was
}, handed the Morey euv.l pc and after
"a + AoA Ao
on the envelope is not in the hand
writing of the person who wruts the
A Rock we'll and Jewell letters, but close
ly resembled the writing of the person
who wrote the exhibits marked A to K.
Allen NJ. Leet, newspaper reporter.
r was examined by the prosecution. He
Was familiar with Pnip's handwrit-
Ing. Inc exhibits A t. x were, the
witness was of OpiniOn, in Philips
, handwriting. Had seen the photo
l lithograph of the MOrey leItsr and be-
lieved It to be in Philips handwriting.
? Thought so when ne first saw q
f sopy. Phnp always had a habit OF
spelling such words as ''companies''
and similar word with "ys" instead
Of "ies" in the Morey letter. This
mistake IL made at this stage OF the
l. case. Mr.. Bell said that he would
ike an aOJ0uFDm0LG as ne mao OtneT
D witnesses 10 examiUe, who were not
;. present He expect ID, he said, a wit
ness from Lynn, Mass, who had not
a yet arrived. and that Mr. Payne, his
q ther expert witness, wss iyiog sick
v and unable to attend. This was OBJ
Z cted 10 by Mr.. Brooke, and General
O Pryor, also for the defence, said he
!. tho yht it WIS due to his side to allow
t him to produes the proof Of the
@ genuinene Of the letter.
a Mr.. Stoughton shook his head
4 aud General Pryor continuing, said
@ ''Ah, well knew my friend would
. shake his he I'D. It is not the purpose
3 of the prosecution to allow US to pro-
) ceed with our evidence 90 that it will
0 let lt have its legitimate effect in the
9 country" (Applause.)
9 Judge DaVis-Ofcers, put out those
l., in the rear portion of the room. This
g was speedily done, and Mr.. Stoughton
q arising. said that he knew now the
g reason why the envelope had not been
% previously produced. The stamps on
u IL were net genuine, and the witnesses
II ID prove that fact would be called from
d washington and from Lynn. He de-
o nleu the lmputatio of Gen. Pryor,
# saying that the prosecution was hon.
q estly conducted.
Q Mr.. Brooks replied, maintaining
/ that II he had proof to offer to
q show the genutneness of the