St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-10-30

| natures. Mr.. Jamison wanted to get
hands upon those which the defense
had submitted to Mr.. Blaisdell when he
was upon the stand and yet held back
in their own possession, while Mr..
Shaw wanted some that were in the
keeping of the state. Mr.. JamiSOn in
with them until they had been identi-
| fed and marked. Mr.. Shaw thought
this was an imposition upon his honor
and resented it in an excited manner,
but Mr.. .JamiSOn held on to the papers
and the court adjourned.
Mr. AmeS again took the witness
stand i'll the afternoon and was QueS-
toned at some length by Mr.. Jamison
in order to give him an opportunity to
explain some of his answers upon
the cross-examination in the fore
noon, which he did quite success
fully. He was shown exhibit 81 and was
asked if he did not find in it many of
the characteristics of Mr.. BlaiSdelFS
signature, Notwithstanding it was writ
ten in somewhat finer hand than most
of the others, to which he returned an
affirmative answer. He proceeded to
point ont these peculiarities, dwelling
much uyon the heavy downward stroke.
the curve in the tremOrS instead OF
angles, etc. During this explanation
he arose from his seat and pointed the
differences on the large photographs. as
well as illustrating them on the black
board. Judge Shaw was evidently net
tied by his manner, and finally tx
claimed:
'If you would give us more testimony
and less argument we would get along
better. Mr.. Ames."
&c xuQl1 - caIN Mr. LAM
isOn.
Proceed. gentlemen" said Judge
Hooker, and the witness continued.
He was shown other genuine sigma
lures, which had been submitted to him
during the forenoon by the defense, IN
order TO draw from him admissions that
they contained certain characteristics
of the disputed signatures, and eX-
planned why, in his opinion, they were
genuine Signatures, although they
differed in some respects from the adj
mitted standards. He analysed them I'D
detail. letter by letter, and, In some
cases, by parts of letters, endeavoring
to demonstrate that in many OF their
distinctive features they harmomZed
with Exhibits B, G, d, E and +, being
the ones which were photographer;
while. in many respects, they differed
| from the signature in dispute. and
proved that the latter was not genuine
| signature, instead of going to show that
! Mr.. Blaisdell might have written 1t.
| One of these signatures was written
! on joint note in very narrow space,
| and the witness accounted for lis pc
| culiaritieS bv that fact. He said that
| probably Mr.. Blaisdell had never before
written his name in such cramped
| place; also, that il was not an Ideal Sig
nature of Mr.. Blaisdell's.
On rc-crosS-eXamination MIR. Wilson
took him up on these assertions. ana ne
explained that the use of the word
.sideal'' as applied to Mr.. BlaiSdell'S
| signature was unfortunate; that he did
no think that gentleman had any ideal
signature.
"Well, | should say not" dryly inter-
posed Judge Shaw.
On the redirect examination, the wit
ness counted the changes of direction
in number of the signatures OF Mr..
Blaisdell, and made them out to be
from fifteen to twenty-one, while he
said that in the disputed signatures
there were eighty-seven.
Much more testimony of this kind
followed; first one side and then the
other taking the witness in hand and
! irving to obtain testimony from him
] L
p, The subject of rhythmical tremOrS or
! spasms was here frequently referred to
! by the defense in terms of sarcasm. as
| though they took little stock i'll the eX-
! iStence of such things, and with an evil
] dent intent to diScredlt 1T i'll the minds
/ of the jnry.
/ Mr. Wilson referred to it at one time
! as rhythmical SpaSmS in unrhNthmlcal
/ time, and Judge Shaw. in speaking OF
/ il. always did so in tone indicating an
4 attempt at sarcasm.
/ =. The witness was questioned by the
/ defense as to the power of the glasses
4 which he used in making his examina-
/ ton, and upon every possible phase OF
the case his reasons for arriving at his
! conclusions, with much more to that eff
/ feet: but upon the whole he stood the
1 ordeal well. and his testimony appar-
! emily made good impression upon
/ the minds of those present.
He was followed by &. c. CuItiSS,
! principal of CurtiSS' business college in
! Minneapolis. Mr.. CurtiSs was first eX
! amiued as to his qualifications as an eX-
/ pert in penmanship and testified that
while he had been a witness in but two
! trials he had often been consulted as to
/ specimens of alleged forged penman-
shin. He said that he has also 40
! peared as witness before the United
! States commissioner in st. Paul as to
| disputed penmanship.
On his direct testimony MIR. CurtiSS
! followed mainly the theory of Mr..
! Bmes. but in addition laid much stress
upon the fact, as he alleged, that all of
Mr.. BlaisdeIl'S signatures ended in
! vanishing line, as if he had said to HIM
| self on completing signature, "Well,
! that is finished;" and in so doing gradu'
| ally lifted his pen from the paper, thus
| making a vanishing line. While i'll the
| disputed signature the end was blunt
! point.
Being asked if he formed his opinion
! from the examination of the signatures
! in evidence, he sad that he had exam
! ined many others, and formed his Oplll-
| ion from them all.
| The defense objected to this testimony
| on the ground that his opinion should
be confined to conclusions formed from
examining the signatures which were
! in evidence.
Judge Shaw objected to Mr.. Curtiss
! giving any more testimony. as, he
| claimed. the witness could not separate
| the facts in his mind IF he were drilled
| from now until Christmas"
! 1t was finally agreed to strike his
evidence out upon this point, and he
! was allowed to proceed after he hau
| said that he could form an opinion from
| the signatures in evidence.
| He was shown Exhibits A, i. c, ID, E
| and +, and Exhibits A to A 80 inclu
| sive, and asked If he thought they were
all written by the same person. He
said:
"In my opinion, Exhibit A was not
written by the same person who wrote
the Others"
He continued at some length to give
! his reasons for this conclusion until
| the court adjourned.