Morning journal and courier., 1880-05-17
Monday Morning, May IF, 1880.
IN A TIGHT PLACE.

The Whitaker case at West Point has reached most interesting stage, five experts | in handwriting having decided that Whitta ker himself wrote the famous. mote of
 warning, /" he being the cadet whose writing, differently numbered fer each examination,
 was in every case picked out as identical
 with the writing of that note.
 There is feeling against expert testimony as to handwriting, just as there is against expert testimony as to arsenic and other things. Notwithstanding this fact, such tes- timony is often very valuable, as in this case
 it seems to be. The tests were fairly made,
 the reports of the experts show that they worked carefully and conscientiously, and
 the reasons they give for the conclusion they reached are understandable. Moreover, the fact of their agreement concerning the writer
 of the note is, considering their manner of
 working, good evidence that they arrived at
 the truth. A part of the testimony of MT.
 Joseph G. Paine, the last of the experts to
 testify is interesting in this connection. He
 declared that he was never better able to ar
 rive at definite conclusions from having diff
 ferent and more definite material to work
 with that in all the papers in set No. the
 similarity of handwriting to the note of
 warning was equally striking; that he was
 engaged on no side in the case, but acted
 freely and independently, and that he had had no conference with other experts in re- gard to the matter. In reply to the court he said that this was the most difficult problem he had ever encountered as a handwriting expert. He received no instructions to see if the handwriting of Cadet Whitaker had not been initiated, could not tell whether specimens of the handwriting of each cadet had been given to him, and as to the matter of the handwriting being forged or disguised he let the papers determine for themselves. That, under such conditions, the five experts should have agreed is extra ordinary.
 But whatever is thought by the general public concerning the force of the concurrent testimony of the experts in chirography, the testimony of one of them-Mr. Southworth concerning the paper on which the note of warning was written will have great weight. The note was written on a half sheet of note paper, and MT. Southworth does not hesitate to assert that this half sheet was torn from a sheet the other half of which was found in Whittaker's room by the authorities. He says: 1.-The fact is easily discernible to or dinary vision with the naked eye. This paper out of set 1, marked by me 'tA twice with a blue pencil, has subject matter connected with mother sheet, which I have marked B twice in blue. The sheet B is torn from another sheet which I have marked 0, twice. Thus, by fact mathematically de- monstrable, the anonymous note is one of four links, three of which are papers of set 1. I have great satisfac tion in discovering this point, which discovery will do much toward settling this whole affair far as the author ship of the anonymous note is concerned
 The truth stands forth to all interest ed friends and foes if there be any, beyond doubt or cavil that this most perplexing and annoying question has been solved. have to the best of my ability arranged two frames of glass so as to exhibit my discovery to any who may wish to examine it. No. is the questioned note placed in juxtaposition with the part of the sheet from set l marked s'An in two places. We further notice the cut of the papers on the top as arranged cut at the paper mill next the ruling and then the ragged edges in juxtaposition where it was separated, perhaps with paper cutter no matter in what way so long as an in dented spot upon one has it's corresponding tooth opposite. So of No ?, which is out of set 1 and marked above described, and placed as I have described heretofore in No l." Although MT. Southworth in this exam ination went outside his usual work as an ex- pert in writing the importance of his discov- cry is not decreased by that.
 Whittaker's manner, which has throughout the examination been dignifed and otherwise commendable, did not change on Saturday when the climax of the case seems to have been reached. Professor Greener is report ed as still believing in his innocence and ex- pecting his vindication, but it is hard to see how the damaging array of testimony against him is to be overcome.