St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-11-05
FRANCIS w. HOLBROOK,
a Witness Who Proves TO Be OF
the InspiratiOnaI Character.

the InSpiratiOnal Character.
Francis W. Holbrook was the next
witness called by the defense, and in
answer to the name dapper-lOoking
gentleman with white hair, black mus
rache and eyes stepped up, was sworn,
and took the stand.
He said that he had been employed in
banks in Albany, n. Y, for twelve
years; afterwards was the financial
agent of AT. Stewart until that gentle
man departed this life, and that he Is
now an expert accountant.
He said that the question Of the for
gerry of Mr.. BIaisdell's name was first
brought to his attention by two stran-
gers. whom he had aScertained were Mr..
Wilson and Judge Shaw.
He unhesitatingly said that, in his
opinion, the questioned Endorsement
was written by the same person who
wrote the same name on exhibits which
had been admitted to De genuine.
Being asked to say to the jury why he
had arrived at this conclusion, he said
/ that he knew it was from the looks OF
it: that it bore the characteristics of
lite and uaturalness. He said that he
was no microscopic expert, and in his
| business had no time for that sort OF ex-
animation; that his habit was to catch
10 a signature and decide at glance
| whether Ii was real or q simulated
one: lust as he would run over lot Of
money in order 10 ascertain II IL was all
genuine, and claimed that he had never
made mistake In regard to these mat
| tiers in his life. He also said that the
! questioned signature was not traced.
| He was then asked If he had examined
any Of the writing Of }. Frank Colon.
and said he had.
"NOw. Mr., HOibrook,'' said Mr.. Will
son. did YOU find any of the character
isties of the questioned signature IN that
WTitingT'
The witness started in 70 reply, but
was stopped by MIR. Jamison, who said:
| awe object TO that question 1t Is en-
tirely irrelevant and incompetent"
The defense claimed that it was adj
Missile for the reason that the witness
es for the state had said that the QueS-
toned signature betrayed certain uncOn-
seious characteristics of the writer
which would be found in his genuine
handwriting; and that, therefore. 1t
was competent for the defense TO show
| that he did not have any such chaTac-
| teristies.
The state claimed the genuine hand
| writing OF the defendant had nothing
| whatever to do with the case; that the
| signature in question might not even
| have been written by the defendant,
| and still he might be guilty of the Of
Tense charged if he had directed it to be
| done.
The argument lasted until 1 o'clock,
when the court adjourned until 2.
At the afternoon session the discus
sion was renewed, and Judge Shaw
made an extended argument on the
= Id 81 ~ <lNh
Mr.. Wellington and Mr.. Brooks for the
state.
Finally Judge Hooker said that. in
his opinion, the evidence was not adj
Missile, but that he wOuldsfike to look
the matter I'D more at his leisure, as it
was new 10 him, and that he would an
| nOunee his decision in the morning on
opening of court.
That branch of the subject was then
dismissed for the time being. and the
witness was asked a few questions on
| erOss-examination. He gave at some
length his reasons for thinking that the
questioned signature was not traced,
the principal one of which was that it
did not show any signs that the writer
had hesitated at any point, but that he
had written it right along just as
though it was his own. When he was
dismissed the name of A. b. South
worth was called. and large old gen.
tleman seated himself in the witness
chair.
Mr.. SOuthworth said that he resided
In Boston; had lived there since 1s41,
| except two years spent Ia California;
| that originally his business was that OF
a photographer; that for the past thirty
| years he had spent much time in exam
lining specimens of questioned sigma
lures and writing; that he had testified
| in a great many cases in New England:
also in New York city. Maryland, Cali
fornia, Indiana, and other states; that
he had kept an accounted the money in
| yolved in these cases, and that it footed
I'D about 81 ,0OO,CO0 He SAID that he
had testified in the Taylor will case, the
VI hittaker court martial. the New York
canal frauds, the frauds in the Michigan
State university, and In many other
noted and important eases.
The state did not question his right to
| testify as an expert and he proceeded:
He said his attention had first been
called to the questioned signature in this
case IN Boston; that he did not have the