The Irish standard., 1900-04-07
FACTS ABOUT SIGNATURES
According to Experts II Man Cannot
Always Swear to His
Own Writing.

The general opinion is that it is an
easy matter to identify signature,
and there are few people who would
not say with positvencss that they
could identify their own signatures
under almost amy conditions. a discus
sion by some lawyers the other day
makes it appear that person cannot
,at all be sure of his signature, be-
cause of the nicely to which the
forger has brought his art.
One Of the lawyers said that no
man could safely go upon the witness
stand and swear that a signature
shown him was his signature. He
claimed that in the Identification of
signature Il person was largely iniu-
enced in his decision by the quality
of the paper upon which the sigma
ture was written and by what pre-
coded or followed the signature If
the name Was written on Il blank riece
of paper, like that in common use,
the lawyer claimed that Il witness
could not swear with any degree of
positiveness that the signature was or
was not his own
In support of his argument. the
lawyer said that handwriting experts
claim that no person can write his
name twice exactly alike. and that
any litigation where signatures are in
dispute. and two signatures appear
that are exactly alike. the experts will
pronounce one of them Il forgery. 1t
may be true that in general conforms
alton two signatures may be alike. but
in saying that no two signatures were
ever made alike. the experts mean
that the loops of the letters and the
distances between them will not be
the same, distinctions which can be
determined only by system of close
measurements. In support of this
theory the experts take the case Of a
farmer who is in the habit of going
from his house to his barn at about
the usual time every morning. They
say that not once in 900 times will
he walk in exactly the same tracks.
Another lawyer told of an eNpe-
rience he had in the trial of case
i'll Tolland county % or so years ago.
A note was in contest and ~ question
'''' AoiSN"A t7 w wv S9Nliuii'NitoS VI AliC
signature. George p. Bissell was called
as a handwriting expert. lie testified
that the signature on the note was q
genuine signature. For the purpose
of testing his ability us Il handwriting
expert, while on the witness stand,
lie was given piece of paper and
asked to write his name three times
y blank space WAS left between the
signatures. Mr.. Bssel did not know
for what purpose he was asked to
write his name. and after the paper
: had been handed to the lawyer who
examined him. it was given by the
lawyer to an expert with the pen. The
expert wrote the name of Mr.. BiSseIl
on the paper three times, and after
this was done Mr.. Bissel was recalled
to the witness stand and the paper
containing the six signatures was
handed him. He was asked to point
out the signatures that he had writ
ten. lie cndeavored to do So but not
one of the signatures he. picked out
as havin" been written by himself was
his writing The three he selected
were written by the pen expert
INcltituCC WAS Ilutt turing lHt con-
vcrsaton to trial which recently oc-
CURED in Washington, where Il will
was in contest. Several experts on
handwriting who testified at the trial
claimed that the will was in the hand
writing of the testator. 1t was
proved, however, that the entire will
bad been traced. One of the relatives
of the deceased had found many of the
letters of the deceased. Words to put
into the will We're taken from the diff
ferent letters, and by chemical proc.
ess reproduced in the document which
made the will. John Shermans name
was signed by one of the witnesses of
the will. and it was also proved that
. the signature had been taken from 4
signature which Mr. Sherman had
placed in an article in Gen Grants
| s.Me.taAirs of the Wa /"
The conclusion which the lawyers
came to when the discussion ended
was that it is not such an easy matter
| to Identify signatures as many people
magine,-Hartford Comp Courant.