The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-01-25

Many Little Peeutiarities IN the woriE Of
Different Pcrsons.

Many Little Pecuffarfttes IN the Work Of
Different Persons.
The typewriter page has no individual
ity for most persons, but . study of the
subject shows many characteristics BY
which the work OF different machines and
different operators can be distinguished.
This Geld presents fewer opportunities than
does that Of the handwriting expert, but -,
nevertheless. Of some interest and impor.
lance. In legal contest the whole case
might hinge on the authenticity Of page
of typewriting.
For instance. II became necessary In a
court not long ago to find out whether one
page OF the long typewritten document In
evidence had not been replaced with an.
other in which some Of the words had been
changed. In this case Of course the sus.
pected page was written on the same kind
OF a machine as the others. The difference
between instruments OF the various manu-.
facturers was therefore Of no service.
An expert stenographer and teacher OF
typewriting was called as witness. In
reply to questions put by counsel he said
that as general rule IL was not difficult
for an expert 70 distinguish between the
writing done upon different machines Of
the same manufacture. Two instruments
might write so nearly alike as tc make IL
impossible to determine upon which ot
them a certain sheet was turr ed ont. Still
there were many little mark, of variance
In the writing OF different machines, and
even of the same one. ut different times or
when used by different persons. The wit
ness did MT believe that the page in ques-
- Al.
others were, nor by the same person. All
might have been written on the same ma
chine, but not consecutively.
The reasons given for this conclusion
were, IN the first place, that the type used
on page seventeen was clean; on the others
many Of the small letters were clogged up.
The ''e" and $50 were especially bad. The
ribbon used for page II was not so much
worn az that for the rest of the docu.
ment, and the writing was more uniform
in color; the latter fact was in part due 10
the superior skill Of the writer OF the single
page. The letters were in better alignment
on that page than on the others, in which
the 50" and "e' were badly out Of their
proper position.
In page IL the 81" was accurately CEN
tered; in the rest IL was to tue left Of
where it should be. The "p" was upright
on the suspected sheet, and leaned tride
on the others, being turned in the bar.
The one sheet, also, had wider margin by
two spaces than those which followed and
preceded 1t.
When asked why he believed that diff
ferent persons wrote the sheets he said
that the operator who turned out page
II was more expert than the other. The
formers touch was more uniform: none II
his letters seemed 10 override each other,
as was sometimes the case on the other
pages. His punctuation marks did not
perforate the paper. The indentations OF
his paragraphs were six spaces, against
five on the rest OF the document. He used
three spaces between his sentences; the
others only two. The first made space
after a comma; the latter did not.
The writer Of the bulk Of the paper was
less acquainted with the rules Of punctua.
ton than was the other man. One man
always put a period and a colon after
the words Ito wit" the other used only
comma. For the figure in the paging Of
sheet II lower case 81" was used; ON the
other sheets capital ~" The jury could
hardly help agreeing with the experts
conclusions. York Tribune.