The San Francisco call., 1897-06-02

state them" was directed again to Ames
al the opening of the afternoon session.
Given his start the volnble expert pro-
ceeded to rattle away at his wonted break
neck pace. Ames talks so fast that Court
Stenographer Smith finds it extremely
difficulty to keep up with him anu is COM
PEELED every now and then to call halt
for breath ard rest.
The expert called attention to the char
acteristics of the letter ia as they ap-
pear in the admittedly genuine writings
OF Fair and in the disputed writings. The
experts who preceded Ames on the stand
also devoted much time and analysis to
this letter, so when this individual re-
terred to it again, and promised TO delve
into the subject deeply, a look expressive
OF that tired feeling spread over the jurors
countenances. Stripped of its technical
lties and verbiage Ames' story about the
"a'' was that in the will he noticed that
the letter was invariably left open al the
top, whereas Senator Fair was seldom
ever guilty of such neglect in forming his
"as. That was the same thing the other
experts employed TO testify for the plain
tiffs said in giving their evidence.
Ames next dissertation was in refer
ence TO the final stroke of the letter ''s."
He had found that Fair often gave this
stroke a twist TO the left--in fact oftener
than he ever did to the right. This, he
said, could not be found in the disputed
will. There the strokes all darted to the
right. Then there were alleged dis
crepancies in the loop OF the letter 'g,!
so Ames said, to support his theory that
the disputed writings were not genuine.
The loops executed by Fair; he said, were
known as ''eccentrics" and in appearance
were like bulbs. But in the will, he said,
he had found what he called balanced
loops"
The capital ''E' he found in the will
was, he said, an imitation of the genuine
letter so far as character was concerned
but not as TO form.
At this iuncture the attorneys for the
plaintiffs held a whispered consultation,
the subject of which was the advisability
of limiting Ames latitude on the stand
1t was becoming apparent to these gen.
tlemen that the expert could lecture
away there for another fortnight without
stopping to take n breath. They had
begun to fear that this would have q mad
dening effect upon the jury and con-
cluded that it was ABOUT time to whistle
down brakes. At the conclusion of the
confab AmeS was admonished by Mr..
Mitchell TO give "only his more impor-
tant reasons" for thinking that the pencil
VIII was not genuine.
Ames picked out the word my" and
said that in the will there Invariably ap-,
peared a little loon at the end of the final
stroke or the ~" and this was something
be could not hnd in the genuine writings
except on rare occasions. The capital
"D's" were, In his opinion, poor imita-
tionS, as were also the capital "ps.' -.
Mr.. Ames pointed 10 the small letter
CIV, and said there was wide difference
between those in the exemplars and those
in the disputed will. The ii st stroke of
the letter was 'whopped up" he said, in
the genuine writings, but was just the op-
posite in the will.
Cropped up, did you say7 2" asked Mr..
Foote OF the defense.
"Whopped up, ;" replied Ames.
DO you mean whooped up2"
No, whopped up"
Judge Slack remarked that he thought
Mr.. Ames said popped up."
tion. as there was good deal of difference
between "whopped up and "whooped
up"
In answer to /. question by Mr.. Mitchell,
Ames said that after q careful examina.
ton OF the letter said to have been written
10 Mrs. Craven on Deee NJ Der 16,. 1894, and
in which the Senator speaks of the deeds.
he had. come 10 the conclusion that shat
document was not genuine. His reasons
for this were an alleged absence of the
sweeps and careless, apid movements
seen in FAIRS writings. He claimed that
the disputed letter was written with q
stiff hand and in very hesitating man
ner.
And he was still giving reasons when
court ad djourned over until this morning.