The record-union., 1893-07-21
JEFFBRIO SIGNATURE.
Banker Miller Gives Some Expert
Handwriting Evidence.
He Thinks Jefferis Signed the San
Francisco Marriage License Book
-ChIrographical Peculiarities.

since the trial began.
After ex-Deputy County Clerk Dan
forth of San Francisco had testified that
it usually took him about fifteen minutes
20 issue marriage license, the prosecu-
ton called Z. w. Melvin TO the witness
stand. The witness used to keep an in
stallment house in this city, and recog-
nized the crayon picture of Jefferis the
one which was formerly in the possession
of Miss Ayers as one he had made for
Jefferis. He didn't want to swear at
first that the man was Jefferis, but later
on he said: when the pictufe was fin
ished l compared it with him-with Mr..
Jetleris, sitting over there"
In answer to Mr.. Hart, the witness
said he went to the jail to look at et1erls,
and could not recognize him.
JEFFERIs' SIGNATURE.
Frank Miller, the banker, was then
called to the witness stand. He said he
had had a great deal of experience in the
examination Of signatures and felt quail
fed to testify as an expert. He was then
shown several of Miss Ayers signatures,
and identified them as having been writ
ten by the same hand. one of these Sig
natures was attached to letter written
by Miss Ayers to Rev. Ferguson, tie
minister who, the prosecution claims,
lock.
The witness was then shown Jefferis'
signature as IL appears on the Arcade
Hotel register, and was asked to compare
II with the signature attached to the San
Francisco marriage license book. After
examining them, he said both were writ
ten by the same hand.
After the signatures were shown to the
jury the witness proceeded to define the
peculiarities which distinguished the
signatures, and which, he said, appeared
in both.
The san AIateo records were produced,
and also the signature of Eugene g. JEFF
1erls, as shown on the marriage license
book of that county. Mr.. Miller said his
opinion WAS that the San Mateo signature
was written by the person who signed
himself George b. Jetferis in the san
Francisco book. Witness said the final
''ris'' in the signature of q. b. Jefleris
and that OF Eugene q. Jet1eris had gem
eral similarity. He noticed in both
tendency OF the writer to go above the
line toward the latter part Of the sigma
ture.
The license book containing Jef1eris'
name when he applied for a license to
marry Nellie Eby, and also the San Fran
cisco license book bearing his signature,
were shown the witness. His judgment
was that both were written by the same
person.
HAD MADE MISTAKES.
Being cross-examined by Mr.. Hart,
Mr.. Miller admitted that he had cashed
checks on forged signatures. lie said,
in answer to another question, he
remembered the circumstance in the
Sharon case, where Sharon, when shown
a forged copy Of his own signature, de-
clared it was genuine.
Mr.. Hart pointed out the 81" in the
Sacramento license book, and the 'J'' in
IA San iron OH -la rOl !
entity. Mr.. Miller, while admitting this
difference, maintained that there was a
pronounced sameness in the signatures
shown him.
There was recess of five minutes, dur
ing which Mr. Miller was allowed to COM
pare the signature submitted to him at
first with a number Of signatures Of jeff
eris, which the defense admitted were his
own. AS a result of the inspection, Mr..
Miller said that the final $50 in the San
Francisco name indicated to his mind
that the pen was forced in making it. 1t
made some difference between that and
other signatures. In the San Francisco
book the letters in the first word
George were disjointed.
1t might have been written by an
other person than the man who wrote
the Others?'
1T might have been"
Mr.. Hart had the witness explain the
peculiarities of each letter in Jetferis' sig
nature, and explain how they compared
III the several signatures.
SIGNATURES MAY VARY.
On redirect examination Mr., Miller
said in the length of time he has been in
the banking business lover twenty yearsl
he had cashed but two or three forged
checks. n PERSONS signature might
change with the lapse Of years and conse-
quent change of habits. Generally, how
ever PERSONS signature remains sub
Stantially the same, though there are very
many variations in the writing. MIR. Mil
Ter summed up his testimony by decar-
ing his belief that the three license-appli-
cation signatures shown him were writ
ten by the same person.
At this juncture the noon recess was
taken.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
When court reconvened Mrs. Julia
Mandy of Brighton took the stand and
identified the crayon picture of Jeiferis.
1t was taken to the witness house by Mr.
Anderson at Miss Ayers request 1t was
in the witness house when the Brighton
Station was burned.
MIR. Miller was then recalled at the re-
quest Of the defense for further examina-
ton about Jefteris' handwriting. Mr..
Hart showed the witness a letter and
asked him if he thought it could have
been written by the same hand that made
some of the signatures.
This brought Attorney Jones to his feet
with a demand that he be shown the let
ter.
The attorneys wrangled for awhile, and
the court ruled the letter out.
EXPERT ABBOTT.
a. 4. Abbott, Cashier OF the California
State Bank, was also called as an expert
on handwriting, ana Mr.. Jones submitted
10 him the documents which Mr.. Miller
had examined. Witness said the sigma
lures to certain certificates signed by
.ietieris We're, in his opinion, all written
by the same person.
The signature OF C. b. Jefferis to the
affidavit made in Sacramento in 1866. for
Il marriage license, Mr.. 4 bbott said was
the same as that on the certificates.
The signatures to the san Mateo appli-
cation Tor marriage license resembled
the others and appeared to have been
written by the same person. Other sig
natures submitted to the witness he
thought to have been disguised.
The examination of witness was long
and devoid of interest, being confined en-
tirely 10 comparisons of various docu-
mentS, the formation of letters, ETC.
THAT TBIP TO SAN MATEo.
II. Is. Breckenfeld, an attache of the
railroad company, produced train re-
ceipts, showing the time of the arrival
and departure of passenger trains be-
tween Redwood City and san Francisco
on the 9th of June, 1872. The train that
left san Francisco at 1:l0 A. N. arrived at
Redwood at S:l7: the S:l5 train at 9:la: the
l0:57 train at ll:50; the 1915 train at I:39
the $50 train at 4:32; and the l:30 train at
5:47.
The object of this testimony was to
show the possibility of Jefferis and Miss
Ayers having gone 70 Redwood City on
that date. when il is claimed they sought