The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-10-06
asked of Mr.. Albright and he again took
his seat behind bis counsel and


asked Of Mr.. Albright and he again took
his seat behind bis counsel and
HIS. ToLMAN
microscopical expert Of Chicago, was
called. Witness Is engaged In any kind
OF business where microscopical examinaS
tions are required and am called micro>
scopist. Witness said: VI have had 12
years experience and have been called to
give testimony In handwriting about two
hundred times. From my experience and
studies, am, in my opinion, competent
TO express an opinion as to handwriting.
Witness related OF visit Judge Day
made to him at his labratory in Chicago
aud identified the note, the alleged con.
fession and other notes, checks and
drafts which had been submitted to him.
Witness continued: "Mr. Day called end
said that he did not want to indicate to
me what his position was or what the
nature of the case was. He submitted
number of papers, picked out two and
said they were admitted to be genuine.
He did not even tell me bis name. l put
the documents handed to me under tho
and came to the conclusion that the sigma.
iure on the $4,000 note and on ths
confession we're not In the same hsndS
writing aa the signatures on th;s o,hsr
papers. spent 10 hours on the exanina.
tion and returned the papers to Mr.. Day
They had been in my possession about "a
hours After minute examination was
kNA Aha .zn 1, n
ination, l have bsen given ample
| Opportunity 70 examine the signatures
and compA ire them and am of the opin-
ion that the $4,000 note and confession
are not in the same handwriting az the
signatures on the other documents sub
mitted to me. That is my positive con,
clusion.
Witness said that Albright wrote
headstrong, precise hand with scarcely
a varience; an unusually precise hand.
He stops bet the ri" and "g," in fact
1t is characteristic OF him. Albright writes
easily and smoothly, without making any
scratch on the paper. The signatures on
the $4,000 note and confession leave a
| scratch on the paper and then is much
more pressure. There is tremor ap-
parent in these signatures, which does
not appear in any instance on Mr.. AL.
brighps signature. The letters were made
each with great precisisn, which does no.
appear on Mr.. Abriehps signature.
There is also a variance in the Let
ters. Witness then gave reasons
~ minute detail, why he had formed his
opinioS that the signatures on the note
and confession were
NOT GENUINE SIGNATURES.
After stating these reasons witness said
there were also suspicious circumstances
connected with the appearance of tho
| note aud confession. 1t had been stated
by Snyder that the straight mark near the
"" on the note was made by the pen
slipping off the paper, making mark on
the note, which, Snyder said,
! was under the confession when
the confession was signed.
Witness said that a mark might be made
in that way but he was positive that il was
not In this instance and could not have
been made in that way. Accounting for
the extension of the line used as a guide
for the signature and which Snyder's clerk
Pinkli stated he had extended one day
just for pssiime, witness stated that II was
his opinion that the person who sigped
that S30, 900 note got as far as the "i'' and
| stopped there, extended the line and then
finished the "ghL" of the signature, Wit
ness explained his reasons for so believ-
| ing.
Court then adjourned until 80 O'Clock,
In the meantime Mr. Tolmap, the witness,
was instructed to bring in his instrume ents,
set them up and place the signatures
under them, so that the Jury might see, by
| personal microscopicaI examination,
| just where the signatures on the note aud
confession were at variance with the siy-
| natures on the documents which are
admitted to be genuine.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
During the noon intermission Expert
Tolman had arranged his microscope and
it was sought by the defense to show a
number OF signatures, including the sigma.
ture on the note, under the microscope.
Judge Amber insisted, before that was
done, upon the opinion of the witness with
reference to the adjustibility of the eye, as
regards the use of the microscope. Wit
ness in an exhaustive explanation state d
that any person could look through a
microscope but 1t took practice to be able
to.draw deductions definitely. The mis-
croscope was adjusted, under the objec-
ton of the plaintiff and the direction of
the expert and the jury, one at a time,
examined the signatures.
There was an insufflciency of light for
the last juror and it was found necessary
to turn on the electric light and arrange
the microscope under one of the electric
jets, at the stenographers desk. As we
go to press the jury has flushed ex amin
ing signatures and Expert Tolman is on
the stand, being rigidly cross examined
Plaintiffs attorneys are coached in theiI
cross examination by Prof. Ewell and
Prof. Hoskins, the experts who have pre-
viously been on the stand.