The San Francisco call., 1897-07-31
VAGARIES Of EXPERTS.
Barnes Says He VIII Present
No Testimony in the
Figel Case,
The Court Is Asked to Familiarize
Itself With the Famous Whit
man Forgery Trial.

Professor Karl Eisenschimmel, the
writing expert called to the stand by the
prosecution in the Theodore A. Figel en-
bezzlement case, gave very strong ev!-
dence in favor OF the defense on cross
examination yesterday morning. He de-
clared that, while it was his opinion that
the $9500 receipt was a forgery, he saw
many strong characteristics that existed
also in those signatures shown him as
genuine.
Aside from the formation OF the letter
II, which the witness declared was made
with one heavy stroke, as was Hoffman's s
custom, he saw that the ink had given
out at the bottom OF the heavy stroke
while the pen was on its way to the first
shaft of the H. The line of the PEN S
travel, however. was visible to him, and
under special Photographic process could
be made visible TO any one but blind
man.
The now famous check raised from S12
to So, 900 by Charles Becker and James
Creegan and passed or the Nevada Bank
Dece m ber II. 1895, was produced in sup
port OF the experts assertion that photo
graphic were better than microscopic re-
productions of details, the camera lens
being more accurate and reliable than the
human eye applied TO the microscope.
En- PEASANT it might be stated that ex-
Judge Murphy corrobOrsted the idea ad-
vanced by The expert. -Tne corroboration
was partial however, and unintentionai.
He looked down into the tube OF the
microscope already placed to view the
$9500-receipt signature and he saw pen
or ink mark next to the letter h. This,
TO the learned counsel, was as gratifying
as:might have been 10 Professor Holden
the. discovery OF some phenomenon up
setting the most cherished theories OF
Astronomer Barnard.
Look again" suggested Elk pert Eisen-
scblmmel, first wiplng fly leg from the
lens: with General Barnes Immaculate
handkerchief.
:: Murphy looked and saw nothing, where
upon he toined in the request that the
witness produce photo ,raphic reproduc-
lions of:inkmarks not visible through the
micyoscoDe. 80.
:. The value of Expert 'Eisenschimme
testimony in regard to the inkInark he
claims exists between thetwo shafts of the
II. is that it positively 1ipsets the opinions
given by others in the phalanX of hand
writing experts lntrod uced blythe prose
cution. They have in more or less en-
..nhatic- way given their. opinion that Isaac
Hoffman never joined the H and the
o letters as in the $500 receipt; that when
they i.were joined the; heavy down
stroke in the second shaft of the H was
continued without raising the pen to the
: frs tshaft and thence across the second
and to the o.. =.
.All:of this. :Eisenschimniel claims was
done; and only because. the ink gave out
the mark or route of the pen is notobserv-
able to the naked eye not trained TO -the
microscope. :.
The expert will have Photographic cop
les of this point to produce in court next
week.
At the hour OF. ;ad iourn ment until next
Monday General Barnes stated that the
defense would produce no evidence in this
court. He suggested, however. that
Judge Cam pbell familiarize himself with
the Aionzo Whitman case tried in New
7 ork. in which many phases were quite
similar 10 those in the case against Flgel.
al have heard of that case" said the
court, ''and l would advise the proseeu-
ton TO. be prepared to meet the points it
must necessarily bring up"