The Portland daily press., 1894-10-26
THE JORDAN NOTES.
Validity Of Signatures in Question in
Superior Court.

lO1 OVuIUs
Did F. C. Jordan of Pennington Sign the
Brunswick acknowledgements.
A peculiar case, involving a serious
question as to the validity of the signatures
to two notes, has been heard in the last two
days in the Superior court before Judge
Bonney. H. W. Gage. ESQ.,. appeared for
the defendant and Weston Thompson, ESQ.,,
for the plaintiff.
Robert Jordan of Brunswick brings suit
against Nellie Julia Jordan. executrix of
the last will and testament of Francis G.
Jordan, late of Pennington, to recover up
on two promissory notes. The first, dated
August 81, 1888, for $40. on demand, the
second dated June30, 1898. for $l25, on de-
mand with interest at per cent.
The defendant has filed an affidavit that
she has reason to believe and does believe
that the signatures to the notes sued on are
not genuine.
Much of the evidence put in was given by
experts in hand writing. two being called
on each side. The standards of comparison
were the documents known to have been
written by both Jordans. Mr.. Thompson
admitted the body OF both notes to be in the
handwriting of Robert Jordan.
When the court came in yesterday morn
ing, Mr.. Gage at once began his closing
argument for the defence. He said that the
case was noteworthy in many respects, but
that he did not believe that having listened
to all the evidence, and .haying examined
all the papers, the court could believe that
the estate of f. q. Jordan. should De COM
PEELED to pay the note in question.
he believed that examination into the
relations of the parties would be sufficient
to show that the notes were not given by
4. q. Jordan. In the first place Mr.. E. @.
Jordan was man of property, at one time
supposed to be worth $4,000, and at the
time of his death at the age of seventy, was
possessed of property worth much more
than 10000 taking the lowest estimate. He
was not man who was in need of money,
and had no occasion to borrow of any one.
But If such was the case with T. G. Jor-
dan, the exact reverse was true of Robert
Jordan, and it had BEEN Shown and was in
evidence that F. G. Jordan frequently
assisted Robert Jordan, who was a much
younger man, and that at his request he
had endorsed his notes, and given him such
other financial assistance as he stood from
time to time in need. Mr.. Gage commented
on letters fl ON Robert Jordan to the old
man, asking him to endorse them for him,
and stating the objects to which the money
would be applied. He claimed that the
evidence showed that Robert Jordan had
been constant borrower of money, and
that f. g. Jordan had been in his case just
as constant lender.
Mr.. Gage took up the notes themselves,
and made the sensational point that one
note fitted into anOthe.. SO closely as to
show that the two had once formed one
sheet of paper, and said that if the opinion
of the experts was worth anything it had
been shown that the two notes were writ
ten at the same time. He would ask his
honor to say whether in his Judgment that
a half sheet of paper WAS kept in Robert
Jordan's desk for two years, and was then
used when he had occasion to write the
second note. He made a strong argument
against the validity of the two notes.
Weston Thompson of Brunswick, made the
closing argument for the plaintiff, and
strongly insisted that the notes were made
exactly as alleged He said that the first
note was the result of previous business
transactions, and the second loan was made
because the old man, although worth a
handsome property, stood in need of ready
money. Payment was not pressed, al
though Robert Jordan could have used the
money to advantage. The loans was per-
fectly safe. the rate of interest satisfactory
and Robert Jordan having expectations at
the death of the cd man did not want to
make him mad. He cultivated the most
friendly possible relations with him because
of that fact and becaues of their long
standingsand mutually helpful friendship.
Mr. Thompson disclaimed the idea that he
! had tried to show that it was an ordinary
business transaction be tween two business
men. There was closer and far more con-
| fdential relation than that between the
| parties. a relation that made it the duty of
Robert Jordan. no matter at what cost or
| trouble TO himself, not to press his aged
| friend for the payment of the notes. He
made closing review of<the testimony in
| the case, and said that he felt that the
| court after reviewing all that had been
| offered on both sides, and having all the
| documents of every nature in the case at
command, could but reach the conclusion
| that Robert Jordan from the first to last
| had acted in the matter as a good friend to
| the old man, and that the standards of COM
| parison would enable the court to determine
| that the signature to the notes was actually
| that of F. C. Jordan, a nd that the notes
/ were given exactly as they indicated, and
| at the time stated therein. AT the close of
| Mr.. Thompson's argument Judge Bonney
| took the papers and reserved his decision.
PECULIAR ACCIDENT.