The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-12-08
WEEKS TOO VERBOSE


from the city of New York by testify
ing as an expert in this case. Witness
said that he had given evidence "a
times in cases. Four fines out Of that
number were in this case. Mr. Weeks
asked if he had always been right, but
the question was excluded. The witness
was asked if he had any special knowl-
edge of chemicals or inks, and replied
that he had in a general way. He
studied chemistry when in school, and
had taken up the matter again when
he began the study of handwriting.
He considered the use of the micro
scope necessary in the study of hand
writing and used one, but had never
taken any special course in microscopic
study He had read works that he
thought gave him the necessary knowl-
edge to use the microscope The wit
ness said that he had for ten years
taught all styles of penmanship.
Mr.. Kinsley was asked if he recog-
nlzed any authority in the question of
distinguishing different styles of hand
writing. He said he only knew of two,
and these he had studied carefully, but
would not say whether he would be
willing to recognize them. Mr.. Weeks
asked the witness If he considered the
examination of disputed handwriting
science but Mr.. Osborne objected and
was sustained. Mr.. Kinsley said he
used practically the same rule and sys-
tenn for settling questions in all cases
Of disputed handwriting.
The court ruled that Mr. Weeks had
gone far enough to establish the COM
potency of the witness. He was ac-
cepted by the court as an expert on
handwriting.
Mr.. Weeks endeavored to bring GER
tain matters to the attention of the
court, when Recorder Golf said. Mr.
Weeks, you are talking without neces-
slty, for the court is not listening to
you"
A long wrangle between counsel fol-
lowed, and after repeated efforts by the
court to stop it, the recorder cried out:
Mr.. Osborne, will you stop? l. think
1t extremely undignified in counsel on
both sides to indulge in this unseemly
Wranging. This is a serious case. A
man is on trial for his life, and surely
in court of law there should be a
semblance of dignity"
Mr.. Weeks endeavOred to explain in
behalf Of the rights of the defend
ant"
Now, there you see, Mr. Weeks, 3"
retorted the court, lis your ever pres
ent and fatal propensity to talk crop
ping out again. If you continue, and
you, too, Mr.. Osborne, in this unseemly
manner, yol. will compel the court to
say something which may be extreme
ly disagreeable to you both"
When certain exhibits, called people s
exhibits Nos. and 4, were offered to
Mr.. Kinsley by Mr.. Osborne, for pur-
poses OF Identification, Mr. Weeks OBJ
jected on the ground that the witness
Tas not a competent one, and on the
| further ground that the specimens of
handwriting contained in the exhibits
were not specimens of the real and nat
ural handwriting of the defendant
| Mr.. Weeks here said he wished an
objection and exception to the remarks
of the court in ruling on the previous
| objection made yesterday. Mr.. Weeks
wish was complied with. The exhib-
it's were then handed to Mr.. Kinsley
again. and identified by him. In an
swer to questions by Mr.. Osborne, Mr.
| Kinslav swore that the handwriting in
the Harpster letter to Frederick Stearns
& Co. and signed H. Cornish was the
same as the handwriting in which Mo-
| liHeux had written at Kinsley's dicta-
| ton. Molineux wrote, at Kinsley'
dictation, the identical words in the
Harpster letter.
| This letter was in part as follows:
Mr.. A. A. Harpster has applied tc
me for a position. He did not refer
me to you, but 1 ask you information
concerning him"
The litter was passed around among
the Jurors and examined by each. Ju.
ror No asked the court for permission
to view The original Harpster letter
and the copy as made by MolineuX to-
gether.
Mr. Osborne offered the witness a
sheet IF the blue-crested paper and
| asked. "Eave you ever seen this sort
| of paper before?"
Mr.. Weeks exclaimed: what posi-
| bic connection? l object on the
grounds that it is irrelevant, incom-
petent.'
II desire tc answer Mr.. Weeks, if
your honor pleases, why this question
is relevant?" shouted Mr. Osborne.
| A long discussion followed, and the
witness said he had never seen any
such Taper until he entered into the
study ~ the case. He then asked per-
| mission to excuse Mr.. Kinsley for a
moment II was given.
John F. Mcintyre, assistant district
| attorney, was called to the stand. Mr..
| Mcintyre said he knew Mrs. Katherine
| j. Adams and that he saw her after
! she was dead. He recognized her dead
| body in the presence of Dr. Weston,
| the coroner's physician, Mrs. Rogers,
| Mrs Hovey and Howard Adams, the
| son Of the deceased.
Apparently all Mr.. Osborne wanted
| of Mr.. Mcintyre was the mere identifi-
| cation of the remains of Mrs. Adams.
| He said he would not call Mr. Mcintyre
for any other purpose. Mr.. Weeks said
| he did not feel that he was prepared at
/ this time to cross examine Mr.. McIn-
| tyre, The court ruled that the defense
| could not go outside of the line pursued
| by the prosecution In establishing the
corpus deficit unless the defense made
| Mr. Mcintyre it's own witness The
court ruled that the defense could call
| Mr. Mcintyre Immediately following
| the examination of Harry S. Cornish
To this Mr.. Osborne vigorously object
| ed, saying that he wanted Mr.. McIn-
| tyre cross examined al once. The mat
ter was settled by the court deciding
| that Mr.. Mcintyre must against take
| the stand on Wednesday. Mr. Kinsley
then resumed the stand and the tech
nical work of examining the paper and
handwriting began. The witness was
handed Harpster's and the bogus Cor
nish letter he had previously identified,
and Mr.. Osborne asked:
do you see more than one word on
that piece of paper spelled 'f-o-r-?"
only one" replied the witness.
DO you see more than one initial
letter Fl on that paper?"
"Yes"
Mr.. Weeks objected constantly and
vigorously.
"Will YOU describe the first initial
letter 'F?' " asked Mr.. Osborne.
Mr.. Kinsley entered into a technical
explanation of the various characters.
The paper was then handed the Jury
men, who examined it carefully. Again
Mr. Kinsley was excused, and a photo
grapher and chemist took the stand.
He said that for Is years he had been
engaged in the study of scientific pho
tographic work. The photograph Of ex-
hibit I'D" was introduced. Mr.. Weeks
said that the defense conceded the