Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-01-10

Witness said many Of the same gen
eral characteristics as those appearing
in the MSrtun address appeared III The
standards.
Il do not believe he said. that if
specimens of the handwriting Of all the
people in this courtroom were prepared.
there would be similarity between any
two of them so marked exists between
the standards and the disputed writing.
wv hat is your opinion asked IN" DIS
trict attorney, ''ro garding the author OF
the STANDARDS and the author OF the dis
puted address,"
Il have not the slightest doubt that they
We're written by the same person.
Tucker paid little attention to this ques.
ton and answer and showed no signs OF
nervousness.
After some argument between opposing
counsel regarding testimony concernint
have been found in fuckers pocket on
the night he was arrested. the pcStal was
not entered as an exhibit but the VII
ness was permitted to describe some OF
the writing on it.
Cross-examined by Mr.. Nahey. Mr.,
French said that in general the standards
We're written with forward slope. He
said that in his opinion, however, tn"
writer had no constant and fixed habit i'll
Witness said that the capital M end
small "a We're not Joined where they
appeared together in the Morton address.
in the 107 stln,lir,iS phntogra phed in
which these tw" '".ttrS We're not joined,
He said however ;''a. where the verti-
cal and ha,khs-& ~ stems of writing
were uead Il Ms -.. customary to Join
the capitAls Wiz. XIII. s,,ill letters follow
ing The ull3G:.N rcttsS was declared
with Exper: French Sull under cross-cX-
Wien the doors. were thrown omen FIR
the afternoon session the spectators rush
i1.-If denied admit
At O'Clock. proceedings We're resumed
and Mr. French took the stand again.
Many questions of a technical character
were asked by counsel for the defence in
the crosS-eyarrination
Nearly an hour of the afternoon session
was ~n"Nt in the cross-examination of
MI French. who was excused shortly be
David * Carvalho of New York. then
took the stand. lie testified that he was
ho;h an expert in handwriting and he had
testified in more than so cases. lie said
that if material in any case were album
dant an opinion could be given 20 a Ger
taintv as tC the authorship Of any piece
OF handwriting. and also the reasons
Therefore" Such was the case. witness
Mr. Carvalho said that the disputed
writing and the standards furnished ma
ttriai for the formation Of 4 dr!lnlte con-
cluion. He sale that undoubtedly the dis
puted handwriting was disguised and that
it was written in hackhand.
With a pad and pencil witness illustrat-
ti 10 tfe JlfN now ndNllS no Ot.lcT sup
port than the pad held In one hand a writ
,r naturally would use the backhand
stroke. In conclusion the witness said:
THE same hand that wrote the disput
ed instrument is the hand. | find and he
lieve. to have written the standards. They
We're. written by one and the same per
son"
He also said he had examined the postal
card found in fuckers pocket after he
was arrested and had found on it writing
corresponding with the writing in the dis
piitrd address and in the standards.
| Cross-exa mined by Mr.. Valley tire wit
moss said in his opinion no deliberate at
tempt had been made by the author of
| the. Morton address to disguise his hand
writing. and that whatever variance ther~
was from the usual handwriting was du,
| t. physical conditions; that is. the man
| ner in which the pad was held. He did
not think the address was in the normal
handwriting of the author
At this point court adjourned till go
| tomorrow forenoon.