The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-01-25

acquainted with the late Senator's hand
writing. The last letter he had received
from Senator Mcdonald was four years
ago. Being shown the alleged will Mr..
Miller eaid: Il do not think the signature
genuine" The duplicate was also shown
him and he said: 1T is q good imitation.
but do not believe it genuine" On cross
examination the witness testified that he
had several COPIES of the testatOr's sig
nature in old letters. He also admitted
that Senator McDonald's frat wife was
q sister to his mother. The Senator, wit
ness stated. wrote q peculiar hand. 1t was
not angular, nor round. nor running. In
making his ID" the Senator bad a peculiar
loop which resembled an 20" and this
feature was not noted in the alleged signat-
ure. Other peculiarities were noted and
described, In which the alleged signature
fell short
William C. David. of Indianapolis. was
for eleven years o deputy in the Office of
United States Marshal Ben Spooner. and
frequently saw the handwriting of Senator
Mcdonald. He frequently had business in
his office, and had seen him write. Having
scrutinized the signature to the will in
question. Mr.. David handed it back and
SAID: "Frcm my recollection of Senator
McDonald's writing. this does not i'm press
me as being his signature" The
witness, on cross.examinatiOn, said
he had seen much OF Senator
McDonald's writing in the Peelle-En Glish
contest in 1882. and he had seen letters
which the Senator had written to his son
Frank. He had first seen the signature to
the alleged will yesterday morning.
Jacob z. Dunn, State Librarian, testified
that be had read law two ears IN the office
both will and duplicate, Mr.. Dunn
gave it as his opinion thas
neither signature was that OF Senator Nc
been tested in the matter. At the Office of
Mr.. CroDsey ten or dozen signatures OF
the testator had been spread out on a table.
the matter to- which they were attached
being carefully concealed. From this col.
lection Mr.. Dunn had picked out two speci-
mems which he had told Mt. Cropsey were
forgeries. il there were any f0rgeries in the
lot. One of the signatures was that at
tached to the will in question. The other
was attached to deed and was genuine.
"Is it not fact" questioned Mr.. Harris
sharply, that you passed this signature as
genuine and picked out genuine one as q
forgeryT
Beng asked to point outsom popularity
of Mr. McDonald's penmanship. Mr.. Dunn
said that just before beginning to write
1t was fashion of his to
dot the paper. This dot was usually be-
fore the -. and the purpose of 1t. he sup.
posed, to be to see if the pen would make
mark. Being handed the will and duplI-
cate Mr.. Dunn said there were the usual
dots on both. but this did not convince
III,
though they had been made by o down
ward stroke, while it was the Senator's
wont to simply touch the paper with the
pen point.
Bank of Commerce. said he had known
Senator Mcdonald since 1868. He had
seen the Senator's signature numberless
times on checks and other instruments.
and was perfectly acquainted with il.
Colonel Ray also claimed to be something
n q m
when his step father had lease on the
southern prison, he lwltnessI was many
times told by forgers and counterfeiters
of the tricks of forgery. and how any
the alleged will Colonel Ray scrutinized 1t
long and carefully.
There is something very familiar in
this" said he. The Donald is exactly as
the Senator signed his name. but don't re-
call that / ever saw his name signed in
full. He always signed his name with his
initials"
Being pressed for an answer. Colonel
was to him very doubtful. Being shown
the duplicate, Colonel Ray exclaimed.
why this 10 worse than the other. My
opinion 10 that this is not Senator McDon-
AIDS signature. but. as told you before.
never saw his authenticated signature
where the name was spelled out in full"
Colonel Ray was prone TO digress to side
issues and give lectures on penmaDship and
forgeries in general. and at times
and Fishback were strained to the
utmost to keep him chained up. He
described the peculiarities of Senator Nc
Donald's hSAdwriring in detail, and indl-
Gated numerous shortcomings in the sig
natures presented, especially in that OF the
duplicate.
Does not q mans handwriting change
as he advances in years." asked Mr.. Har-
ris
ut does some times" was the reply.
"Some mems writing gets better; q lawyers
gets worse. Yours addressing Harrisl. was
bad TO start with. and 1t has steadily
grown worse. The Same is true of Fish
Backs"
Smith Myers. of indianapolis. testified
that he had been cashier in the State and
county treasurers' Offices He had known
Senator Mcdonald from fifteen to eighteen
years. and was familiar with his writing.
and testified that to the best of his opinion
the signature to neither was genuine.
Isaac Dunn testified that he was q resi-
dent of Indianapolis; that he was deputy
coroner under Marker. and member of the
bar.
Question by Mr.. Fishback. What bari"
Mr.. Dunn stated further that be had been
in Senator McDonald's law office as q
student several months. and was familiar
with his writing. He testified that he
would not consider the signature to the
will genuine but as to the duplicate he
was unwilling to express an opinion.
William Hay. deputy collector of Gus.
toms, was the next witness. but his an
swers to questions prompted the attorneys
for the defense to raise the question of his
competence to testify. Court adjourned at
8 o'clock, and the question OF Mr.. Hays
competency as g witness went over IN
Til this morning.