Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-28
SOLVING A MYSTERY
Experiences and Microscope Brought
to Bear on the Holt Will.
WRITING COMPOSITELY PHOTOGRAPHED
A Former Coachman Recalls Some
interesting Incidents.
j q RY Sc E ED G E S

The Introduction of expert testimony In
the Holt will trial marks new stage in the
proceedings and opens up a broad field.
which will doubtless be worked for all 1t is
| worth. While the other side has given no
intention Of 1t. yet 1T is to be expected that
they will have expert evidence in rebuttal
to the effect that the alleged will Is a gen
uine document.
Expert testimony is always open to at
tack. and DIR. Frazier. the witness who was
put upon the stand yesterday for the
| caveators, and who testified that in his
opinion. the will was not in the same hand
writing as the twenty-four letters from
Judge Holt. which he examined so care
fully, said that he would not be at all sur
prised If another expert should go over the
same ground and arrive at a different con-
clusion.
Notwithstanding 1T was so technical, the
evidence of DIR. Frazier was intensely in
terestlne and showed a precision and re-
search that are not always characteristic of
experts on handwriting. In reaching his
conclusions he left out of consider alton
what he termed the pictorial appearance of
the handwriting-rhat Is to say. The impress
sion that one would derive from looking at
H. He devoted all his attention to the con-
sideration Of what he called the ratios and
angles of the writing, and by this means he
Will could not have been written by tho
same hand that wrote the letters which
are admittedly genuine.
Dr. Frazier said that. in his opinion, there
was more pictorial resemblance" between
the alleged Will and the genuine writings
than there was between the revoked will
or lSfS and the alleged will Of 1873 but a
study OF ratios and angles showed that the
Two latter papers were written by the same
person. while the alleged WILL In its essen
tial characteristics. differed materially from
the letters which Judge Holt wrote about
that time.
DR.. Frazier Resumes.
When the Holt will trial was resumed
this morning DR.. Frazier. the expert on
handwriting. was called to the stand for
further crosS-examination.
In answer to question from Mr.. Butter
worth he said that his method Of .xamin-
ing handwriting was an attempt to do by
means of figures what a composite rho-
tosraph does pictorially. 1t gives an aver
age of all the simar.ies and dissimilari-
ties.
Then your whole theory rests on the
doctrine of probabilities"
1T does
Then the greater number Of measure
ments you take the more likely you are
TO arrive at the truth. doctor"
We'll. the more likely you are to reach
true average.
Mr.. Butterw orth then yut the witness
swers as TO the means he had adopted in
me assuring lines. angles and loops in the
words which he had studied 1t was an
enort on the part of the lawyer to corner
the expert. and to cast a doubt on his
method. effort in which the expert did
not get the worst of IT at all. Once Mr.. But
terw orth appeared to think that he hal
the witness badly tangled in his meshcs
DR. Frazier denied that he meant any such
thing as Mr.. Butterworth implied in a
Grestion on the subject Of averages.
But that is the logic Of your position
said the lawyer
1T certainly is not logic" replied DR.
Fl azier. tartly. nor is that my position"
Even Judge Bradley smiled family as he
IeEped for order in the court room.
DIR. Frazier Wants Y.
The Characterization reverted again to
the subject of the formation of some Of the
letters and the reasons that the witness
had for thinking that some of them were
written with a free hand with force.
desire for symmetry and an extra pressure
on the pen. These were characteristics. he
said. that appeared in the alleged will but
are not evident in the ordinary writings of
Judge Holt at about the same date. Who
ever wrote the will, he said, used stub
pen. AT Mr.. Butterworth's request the wit
ness gave his reasons for thinking so.
Mr.. Butterworth later pointed to the
word liable" in one of Judge Holts letters
and asked the witness If he did not regard
1t as written in free hand.
"A free hand for Judge Holt, yes: for the
rest of the world, no." answered DIR. Fra
Eier. He made similar answers with refer
ence TO a number of other words that We're
called to his attention.
In reply to query from Mr. Butterworth,
Dr. Frazier said that he was the originator
Of this system of identifying handwriting.
This concluded the croSs-examination
On redirect, DR.. Frazier said that in
the body of the alleged will there was
no other final ''y' that correspondent in
shape and shading to the ''y'' in February,
the tail of which crosses the break In the
lower part Of the paper. There are sixteen
other final VS. in the document, all os
which differ materially from this one
Mr. Worthngton remarked that If any
one could find ''y'' like this in all Of
Judge Hollis correspondence, he would
like to 1t.
Celebrating Little Things.
The witness. IN reply to a question from
Mr.. Worthington, again said that there
are more changes in the slope or slant of
the letters in the alleged will than there
are In any Of Judge Hollis epistIes of
about the same date. The word in" at
the beginning of tho alleged will. he said,
WAS marked by greater symmetry and
showed better command of the pen on
the part of the writer. than does any other
word In all the correspondence he had ex-
amired.
DIR. Frazier said that the microscopicaI
examination of the edges of the break In
the alleged will did not show such a con-
dttion of fibers as would warrant the
statement that the two fragments were
formerly parts of one piece of paper There
was no interlocking of the fibers
In answer to a question from Judge Brad
ley, Dr. Frazier said that, in his opinion, the
division between the upper two-thirds and
the lower one-third Of the will took place
BEFORE 1t was pasted on to the backing
The separation SO evidently the result
OF cutting by sharp instrument and not
by abrasion. that he could not conceive
how the separation could have taken place
after the pasting without injurng the back
ing.
Then you think that the two pieces were
cut apart before they were pasted on the
backing" asked Mr.. Butterworth
Il did not say So said the witness cara
fully choosing his words Il think that
each piece was cut before the FASTING was
done. but whether they were cut apart fro,r,
each other or cut from two entirely differ
ent pieces of paper and then pasted TO-
gether, l am quite unable to say
The Jury at the Micro.cope,
At this point the members of the Jury
were given a lesson in microscopy under
the direction of Prof. Frazier The will
was placed under the microscope and the
Jurors were taught how to look through It
properly DR.. Frazier stood over the In