Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1888-01-20
ganuine signature.1

lH oil UuS SCuUOlS III WHICu l. tdukuus al
ter examining the notes with genuine
signatures of Miller, [ see nothing to
change my opinion expressed-that have
grave doubts of the genuineness of that on
this note. Here witness called attention
to lack of similarity to the genuine, which
was found in the A r and II in the
disputed note. Asan experienced observer
of psnmanship 1 should say the signature
on the disputed note had the appearance
of constraint Mr.. Miller is very eau
tious man in business matters. [ don't
think he IS man to sign note without
looking at it. as Mr.. Bodell testified. When
he had letters written at McCorkle Bros.
he never signed them without reading
their contents. He seemed even more
particular about such matters when he
had had drink than at other times.
A juror-IIe takes a little drink, don't
he ?
Judge Sheffey-Oh, he belongs to the
Vets
The Defendant-May it please your
honor, I have great many friends in
that. (great laughter.)
Mr.. Jordan, resuming-l have grave
doubts about that being A. ]. Miller's
signature, and my doubts have been
strengthened by my examination of the
genuine notes of his on exhibition here.
Cross Eramined bq Mr.. Harrison-Yes;
could point out differences between the
genuine signatures themselves.
By Judge Shefey-It is just as likely
that the blotting of the signature might
be made by the forger being suddenly in
terrupted in his work, as by the folding up
blotting of the final ''r'' in Miller, might
have been occ asioned by the forger, unused
to writing the name, emitting the ''r'' and
then afterwards putting the ''r'' where he
had made the comma.
Juror Zirkle-If that note had been
presented to you as Mr.. Miller's, there
being 20 contest about it, would you have
received it as genuine
Witness-I would.
JOHN s. M'CORKLE,
of McCorkle Bros, Middlebrook, sworn
have known Mr.. Miller eighteen or
nineteen years. L suppose. on an average,
1 have seen him twice a week. Our bust
ness transactions with him have been con-
tinuous during that time. Mr.. Miller, in
my opinion and in business transactions
with him, is an exceedingly cautious man
about signing papers and lending his name
where his interests are involved. [ have
always regarded him as more cautious
when he had had little dram, than at
any other time. l have never seen him
unable to attend to business from drink
ing He has often gotten letters written
in our Office, but 7 never knew him to sign
one without reading it first. My impress
sion of Mr.. Miller Is that he is more eau
tious than most people. would select
him as being the last man to endorse a
paper without knowing what he was en-
dorsing. The endorsement On this disputed
note was shown to me by Mr.. Harrison on
the street. 1t resembles his signature, but
have never regarded it as genuine, and
with the additional light have had, am
the more strongly of that opinion.
Cross. eGanained by Mr. 1uc&er.-If this
note was presented to me by Col. Cochran
in business transaction l would recog-
nize it as genuine endorsement. think
the writing of the signature is overdrawn,
but L would, as any man would, have
taken it as genuine in a business transac-
ton. | think the "r'' ia the name is
noticeable defect.
BY Mr.. Harrison Surprising Miller to
have been in bis senses, would not think,
from my knowledge of him, that he would
endorse any note under the circumstances
detailed by Bodell, and when he hadn
seen the face Of the note.
C. s. BAKER,
merchant, SWorn.-l have kn own Mr..
Miller fer some years and done business
with him. He is an extremely cautious
man in business matters. have never
seen piece of paper endorsed by him. [
have seen Miller's signature regularly, say
once year. have seen the note in dis
pute and doubt if the endorsement is in
his handwriting. Nor do | think it is
even good imitation. If my scrutiny
were called to it l would not receive it if
presented to me. [ have compared it
with a genuine one shown me by Col.
Cochran and did not think it was genuine.
On comparing it later in Capt. Bumgard-
ner's office with larger number of genu-
inc signatures, my opinion was confirmed.
Miller wouldn't sign note even when
presented by our firm without examining
it.
w. A. BURNETT,
Clerk of the County Court, sworn. I an
clerk of the Augusta county court and have
necessarily had great deal of experience
with handwriting. Have not seen much
of Miller's writing and cannot say that I
am familiar with it. The witness was
here shown the disputed note and batch
of notes with Mr.. Miller's undisputed
signature on them. After a long and
careful comparison he said: ''It is very
hard to discriminate between the sigma
lures.
Crose E1amined by Judge Shefay.-On
the whole cannot express an opinion one
way Or the other about the genuineness.
A. j. MILLER,
the defendant in the suit, sworn. am
the defendant in this suit. have heard
the testimony given here. (Witness here
looked at the note in dispute). never
signed any such note. I never signed
that note. Bodell came to me as he has
stated; L was in Browns wagon yard, He
jected. He begged hard saying he was
needing the money. I went to Thorn
burg's office and endorsed note for $780,