The San Francisco call., 1897-05-13
THE DANGER OF
EXPERT TEST IMONY
II Was a Subject for De-
bate in the Fair-Craven
Trial.
The Denunciation of It by the
Supreme Court Is
Quoted.
Photography and the Magnifying Of
Handwriting Was Another
Theme for Discussion.

Expert testimony on handwriting re-
| ceived a trouncing on general prin-
ciples yesterday in the Fair-Craven
trial. D. M. Delmas, leading coun-
sci for the defense, led the
charge, and while it was in its nature pre-
liminary, still it was an indication that
the experts who, it is alleged, will testify
that the signature OF James u. Fair to
Mrs. Nettie Craven's deeds is spurious are
not destined to tread a path strewn with
roses in this particular case.
The debate during which the scoring OF
this class of evidence was administered
took place during the afternoon. when
John P. Donovan took the witness-stand.
This gentleman earns has livelihood by
enlarging pictures and following the busi-
ness of general photography.
He said in answer to Attorney Mitchell
that he had been engaged by the Fair
estate to reproduce on magnitied scale
number of the late millionaire's sigma
lures. He had the original negatives in
court with him. and when told 10 do so
prod uced them and iden titled them. Some
OF Attorney r. B. Mitchell's help now
came trooping into the courtroom bearing
a varied assortment of bundles. These
| were the enlarged photographs of Fairs
bank-check signature, and there was
great pile of them. Mr.. Donovan iden-
| titled these as specimens of his handi-
work, and then Mr.. Mitchell offered them
| in evidence 'for the purpose OF future
comparisons of the genuine and disputed
| signatures of the late James G.. Fair"
| Mr.. Delmas objected to them, and in
| telling why be did so claimed that the
copies were inadmissible under the law
l 10 r,r asv.1a
| He read from decision of Judge Camp
bell of the Michigan Supreme Court, in
which that eminent jurist deals severely
with photogra phic copies in tests of al
| legged forgery on account of their unrelia-
bility, and in which he also decries the
| idea of taking too much stock in evidence
given by handwriting experts. "The lat
| ter gentry" wrote Judge Campbell, 'are
very often found to be mere pretenders TO
knowledge, and their testimony Is in the
nature OF an evil" Mr.. Delmas argued
| that the Campbell decision was sound
law, and law that ought to prevail in this
case. Under the California Code. he said,
copies of documents were not competent
evidence to go to the jury when the origi,
mails were obtainable. He said he would
not object to allowing the jury to exam
Inc originals.
Mr.. Mitchell combated the position of
the defense by reading lot of authorities
tending to show that photographs OF wills
and documents were allowable for pur-
poses of identification and comparison.
Among his supporting references was
United States Circuit Judge Deady's de-
cision in the celebrated Sharon case. In
that decision the opinion was given that
enlarged copies of documents were useful
in cases of disputed handwriting.
Mr.. Delmas in reply cited the recent
decision OF the California Supreme Court
in the case of the People VS.. Buckley. In
| that case, he said, the highest State
| tribunal reversed conviction for forgery
| just because that conviction had been
| secured by means of expert testimony on
| handwriting. The court denounced this
| kind of evidence as dangerous and un-
reliable. The experts testify whichever
way they are paid to testify, and it was
pernicious custom that the courts had
| permitted to develop in allowing much of
this kind of evidence and one that 1t
wou d be found difficult to eradicate.
Mr.. Delmas laid particular stress upon
the concluding declaration of the court,
| to the effect that conviction and impris-
onment, founded altogether upon the
testimony of experts on handwriting, was
said that if enlarged photographs and
expert testimony on handwriting were
tolerated the trial would start off with
| one of the lowest and most despicable
! classes of eviden nee known to the legal
fraternity. If the jury was to make COM
PARSONS of signatures, genuine and dis
puted, the originals alone could be prop
| erly used.
The argument was carried on by both
sides until quite late, and when ruling
was finally due Judge Slack said he would
admit the Photographic copies, but merely
for the purpose of illustration and con-
yenience."
| Mr.. Delmas remarked that if illustra-
! ton and convenience would be the limit
of the evidences potency he would not
object to it at all. But he gave warning
that any attempt to use the enlargements
| for any other purpose would be vigorously
| opposed by the defense.
Expert Theodore Kytka occupied the
witness stand during the forenoon session,
| testifying that he took q numb Der of photo
graphs of samples of Senator Fairs hand