Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-03-28
the conditions. The witness had used a
Iow-powered microscope In examining the

the conditions. The witness had used
low-powered microscope In examining the
paper.
CROSs-EXAMINAT1O
On cross-examinatlon Mr.. Wilson'S first
question was as to what the witnesses
charges per day as an expert were. The
witness said IL depended upon the charac-
ter OF the work; the length Of the exami-
nation: the length Of time he was de-
tained from his office
Mr. Wilson asked again what his charge
per cay in n case like this was
j never saw a case like this said the
witness.
The witness being further questioned,
sald he was not In the habit OF making
a charge per day. In one case he had
made such a charge and had charged 80
q day. The witness was asked how often
he had been called on TO testify az an
expert. lie said It might be fifty or sixty
cases or less. lie said he had no schedule
Of charges.
Mr.. Thompson objected to questions
about his charges.
Mr.. Wilson said that he had right to
ask that. and insisted that that was one
| Of the first tests recognized by the books.
Judge Bradley said the question was
fair one.
The witness said in one examination he
had charged $75. in another $25. in another
| so, and In another s.. lie had not gone
into court in all these cases and testified.
lie had made he examinations Of the
J papers I'm this case Sunday night at his
home and al the courthouse. yesterday.
MIR. Wilson asked how he had got the
/ papers at his house Sunday night, and the
/ witness said that Mr. Breckenridge, Jr.,
U N.Wf Nrr1ms Fp.
| two persons he thought. who came with
Mr.. Breckenridge. but they remained out
| side. Witness kept the papers and
| brought them 20 the courthouse yester-
I day, where he continued the examination.
/ He examined them with a magnfying-
glass. which he exhibited 10 Mr.. Wilson.
| He examined the Christmas-card at the
| courthouse yesterday. He was engaged
| two or three hours In examining the let
| ters and card at the post-ofiice. lie did
| not submit the ink on the card TO any
| tests other than an ocular examination.
| Witness said that If the ink was not man.
| rflctured by some chemist for the purpose
! Of deceving him he was perfectly sure
that II had not been on the paper more
| than three or four years.
POSSIBILITY OF ACCURACY.
The witness was pursued by Mr. Wilson
! for some time as to the possibility OF NIT
| thcmatical accuracy in determining dis
| puted matters as to writing and the age
| OF ink. The witness, in reply, said that
| he was more positive. more mathemati-
| cally certain, that the letter ne had testi-
/ fed to was written by Madeline Pollard
/ than he was as 10 the possible accuracy
| Of the date Of the writing on the Christ
| mascara When asked what his opinion
was as 10 the writing on the card if he
lo. H.. s,.Il hot Ea Iaa .i4.t
! eight or nine years in a book. he said
/ that he could then believe that some
/ one had taken the card out written On
| it, and put it back.
When asked If some one testified that
| the card had been in a book nine years,
! and not taken out. whether he would be-
! loVe such testimony or have more faith
| in his own conclusions than in the testi-
! mony: Il prefer to leave that question
TO the jury said the witness.
! "Well, We viii leave II to the jury
| said Mr.. Wilson.
ADMITTED DISSIMILARITY.
Mr. Schaeffer was then examined as to
| his method Of comparing handwritings. to
! establish the fact that they were writ
| ten by the same person. Witness said II
/ he were employed 10 find slmilarities he
would look for them more closely than if
!
/ be Influenced by a desire 10 prove what
| those who employed him wanted; ne also
/ regretted having To- give an adverse opin-
ion. Mr.. Wilson called the Witnesss at
tention to a letter &C." in the word col
lege in the letter asserted 10 be- a forgery.
and another CO. in another letter by Miss
Pollard, and said they were dissimilar.
/ lis attention was called also 10 two let
= ter "W's" in the different papers which
were dissimilar. lie said he would not
/ base a judgment that they were written
! by the same or a different person on these
dissimilarities. lie had examined twenty
or more testers and based his Judgment
on the general character Of the writing
The witness attention was called likewise
10 two "l's,' ana said there was a general
similarity in them and a particular dis
similarity. He was shown also two capt.
tai "P's," ana said if he had seen them
In different paperr ne would not have
supposed them 10 be written by the same
person. but II was not impossible or i'm
probable Mr.. Wilson went on calling at
tention TO other letters, to the year in
each, 'lNsi" and the witness admitted
their disslmilarty. The witness. speak
ing OF one Of these comparisons made
by Mr.. Wilson. said If he had to base his
opinion upon the comparison Of those let
ters alone, he would Cravcly doubt
. whether the papers were written by the
F same person.
The cross-examination Of Dr. S .haeNor
was in progress when the midday recess
was taken.
ROSES FOR THE JUDGE.
As Judge Bradley ascend.d the bench
this afternoon a bailiN PLACED before him
a small bunch Of magnificent roses. Tic
flowers were accompanied 81 a note and
as tbe Judge read il his usually severe
features broke into a smile, which .9di-
Gated better than all else the pleasur, the
flowers gave him. OF course. the Court
dit not publish the name Of tie donor OF
the roses, but IL il safe 10 say that the
great majority Of those present believed
that they came from some one who sent
them in recognition Of the Courts reIlec-
tions yesterday respecting ;hc nature OF
the testimony In the case.
Another small crowd was in attendance
when the trial was resumed after recess
to-day. the trial having a strong rival in
the interest of the freQuenters Of the court
house In trial in Judge Coles court.
At the afternoon session br Schaeff,r
resumed his place upon the witness stand.
and his cross-eXamination By Mr.. Wilson
was continued as t. particular details in
the dubious letter as compared with the
letters admitted to have been written by
Miss Pollard.
He was asked by Mr.. Wilson whether i'm
the case Of feigned writings It was not
true that the writer would forget himself
and let some Of his own peculiaritics Greer
in. lie said that such was the case. Ir, the
case Of a frec-hand writer such a state OF
things would be particularly likely Otter
qualities Of a feignod hand We're also gone
into.
QUESTIONS AS TO DATE.
lie was shown the word July" and
said IT was written 10y person who had
the free use Of the pen, and was above The
average penman. In his opinion. the party
who wrote the word did not try 20 chargr
his hand when he came to write the
figures after H. lie was asked If tho
figure "2' did not show the characteristics
Of style of "A person not used TO writing
but said that he did not think this Il
be the case. Asked about the figure.
"1sSi." he said he did not think the,
looked like an attempt at feigned hand
writing. Mr.. Wilson pursued him witt
questions rapidly, and H. varied form 4.
to whether he did not think the is,ure,
were in cramped hand. and written OF
ferently from the July" but the ,yitnes,