The record-union., 1899-04-22

WILLOWS, April 21.-Attorney Grove
L. Johnson did not take up the cross
examination of Expert Ames in the
Murdoch case this morning. The de-
fense asked the privilege to examine
Ames further, which was granted.
Before it was done, Mr.. Harrington,
President of the Colusa County Bank,
was put ON the stand. The witness said
he was acquainted with Murdoch in his
lifetime, and had seen him sign a great
many papers. Some notes and checks
of Murdocks' which had never been Of
fered I'M evidence were handed him, and
he identified the signature on each as
being that of Murdock, and said they
We're signed in his presence
An objection was made by Johnson,
which was overruled.
Anres again took the stand, and
Barnes handed him some papers that
had never been offered in evidence,
which We're badly mutilated, and asked
that the expert examine them.
1t was objected to by Johnson, and
the objection was sustained.
Other papers were handed him by
Barnes, all of which were objected to-,
the objections being sustained.
Barnes asked number of questions
in regard to peculiarities of Murdock' s
handwriting, to all of which objections
were also made and sustained by the
court Two checks of 1877 and also
the 100000 note were handed him for
examination.
The witness said on the note the ex-
treme length of the name, s'Murdock, -
was one inch and one-twentieth, and
upon the checks it was two inches He
was handed deed of 1890 He said on
this "Murdock' was precisely the same
length as the "Murdock'' of the note.
The witness said, further, that, in
making the WIN" of the deed the ink
did not flow freely, and consequently
the VIM" was not made as intended.
He here showed by illustration, with
a. standing objection from Johnson, how
the VIM" would have looked if the
pen had worked as it should.
A recess of ten minutes was then
given
After recess An1es put a check Of
William Murdoch, drawn September 70,
1877, under the microscope. The court,
jury and counsel all took a look at this.
The witness said: Il find that the
lines are all uniform and the surface
of the paper was not disturbed
Several portions of the signature of
the note and also portions of other sig
natures of Murdoch We're examined
through a microscope in this way. The
purpose of this was to show the ragged
and torn condition of the signature of
the note in contrast to the smooth and
easy signature of the checks. The wit
Ia cic Of or
of a clumsy and irregular sort
Just few seconds before adjourn
ment for noon Barnes said he was
tired, and was through with the wit
ness.
Grove L. Johnson's cross exam nation
of Expert Ames this afternoon was
short.
The witness testified as to making a
report on the questioned signature to
the executors. He said he had no doubt
that the signature to the note was writ
ten subsequent to the 1890 deed, and
that If thousand men testified that
they saw the name written at a prior
date, the witness would believe they
were mistaken or lying.
Ames said he had given testimony in
cases wherein other experts disagreed
with him, and admitted that in the
Davis will case in San Francisco Ex-
pert Eisenschimels testimony was con.
trary to his.
Mr.. Ames said he was to receive $50
and 500 per day for his present ser
vices, according to the nature of the
work
Expert Carl Eisenschimel was then
called. He testified that he made a re-
port on the signature of the note in
January, 1898, at the request of Can
non & Freeman, attorneys for Mary
Helen Murdoch, the plaintiff. He ex-
amined the questioned signature in
connection with the deed of 1890 and
other signatures, and informed Mr..
Cannon at San Francisco that he be-
lieved the signature to the note a for
gerry.
The witness demonstrated to the Jury
from blackboard drawings and enlarged
exhibits of admitted signatures of Muir
dock, and told how he believed the sig
nature to the note was forged by trac-
ing, drawing and patching
Eisenschinel said that Murdock wrote
ffuently while the note signature was
hating and retraced.
More microscopic examinations of ad-
mitted and questioned signatures were
made by the Judge and jury
Before the witness had concluded an
adjournment was taken.