The Portland daily press., 1892-10-26

the similarities of samples of any one
letter, but on the general similarities OF
many letters running through it all.
Q.-But if in single instance you find
no essential distinguishing differences,
how does a multitude of such cases make
any difference
The witness thought the same tenden-
cies to use two forms for the same letter
running through all the letters showed
that the same man wrote them all
Q.-Is it not quite common thing for
men to use two forms of letters?
Witness thought it was not common,
although same men might.
The letter 0 was next taken. 1t ap
pears in two forms in the letters, and
these forms were, the expert said, found
running through the anonymous letters
and the standards. Judge Symonds,
find another like it.
The expert said the loop in the letter
was the feature that was similar in the
O's.
Judge Symonds again requested MI.
French to point out another O like
the one, referred to.
The expert finally said he could not
point out another exactly like it.
The letter S was next taken up, the
witness after a long series of question
ings finally saying that a difference be-
tween initial and final small SIS was COM
mon in handwriting.
The expert also found in the US a
sssag'' which he said ran through all the
letters. Also the US were made with a
single downward stoke without loop.
Judge Symonds then referred to the
letter of May Dist, '91 THAT printed in
the PRESS of yesterday, and referring to
the word s'fying," asked if the loop of
the F turning back was not feature of
all the anonymous letters, if it was not
a feature of the anonymous writings and
not of the original standards.
The witness answered: Well, that is
disguised handwriting.
Q.-Then do you hold that all the diff
ferences in the letters are evidences of
disguise, but all the similarities are evil
dence that the same hand wrote all the
letters?
OIL should not like to answer that
directly.
Judge Symonds then took the letter of
May 81, '91, and pointed out the US and
asked if those two loops in the letter
were not found through all the anony-
nous letters and not in the standards.
Witness said he considered this an
evidence of deep design on the part OF
the writer who systematically disguised
his hand. Witness did not believe that a
Y would be naturally written with these
two loops.
Counsel then asked if punctuation
was an important matter in determining
handwriting.
The witness admitted that such was
the case, and also that the anonymous
letters were without punctuation and the
standards were punctuated.
The court, however, interfered here to
check the cross-examination in this di-
rection on the ground that it had gone
far enough.
The cross-examination then took
another turn as follows:
OIL understand you to say that all
three of these anonymous letters are in
disguised hand?
Al so consider it,
Q.--And all three are in substantially
the same disguise?
Ayes, the disguise is carried
through very remarkably?
Q.-And that disguise is sustained
throughout?
Ayes.
eff it came to your knowledge that
two of those letters were written in
May, 1891, and the other in July, 1892,
and they are in precisely the same dis
guise as you say, how should you ac-
count for that disguise being sustained
over such an interval of time?
Al can't tell you. I think it is re-
markable-the similarity carried through
these anonymous letters.
Q.-You haven't any theory whatever
to account for such disguise being sus-
tanned over such a lapse of time?
Al consider it possible. When a
person has made an attempt to disguise
once or twice don't know why they
should not carry it through again.
Q.-As Il mere speculation in mental
philosophy, do you think it possible for
man in May, 1891, to adopt and carry
out a carefully disguised handwriting,
send the letter out of his possession and
then year and twomonths afterward sit
down and write another letter in exactly
the same disguise?
Al don't know but what the party
kept copies of the letters and had them
to initiate.
Q.-Do you think that is fair answer
to my question?
Alt is a question can't answer.
don't know why person couldn't carry
them in his mind.
Henry C. Kendall
of West Roxbury. Boston, a professor of
penmanship in Boston, since 1858, the
head of the Normal Writing Institute,
and one frequently consulted as an ex-
pert since IS or 66, was next called. He
is a. short, nervous-appearing man, with
black hair, heavy, black moustache and
slight goatee, and wears black rubber
trimmed eye glasses.
He identified the anonymous letters
and standards as having been examined
by him last July. In his opinion ''every
letter and every stroke was written by
one and the same hand. His reason for
so believing was that the similarities
were ''strong and sometimes startling"
81 object" said Judge Symonds, who
held that it was not competent for a
witness to use his own strong and gener-
al terms without specifying special in
stances upon which he based his opin-
ion.
The court thought the word 'start-
ling' might be rather strong, but an ex-
pert has a right to express his opinion.
His reasons began with the small RS,
SIS and WIS. The similarity of the RS
was striking. The SIS were distinguished