Daily Kennebec journal., 1905-01-18

lunch boxes and ate while standing
| in line.
| Continuing his replies to the at
torney generals rOss-examination,
Mr.. Hay said that breaks between let
| ters would not be caused by the man
ner in which a small pad of paper
| would be held.
Have you any fears asked Mr. Par
ker ''of revealing any facts in conncc- =
tion with this writing that would he det-
| rinental to the defence"
NO, sir" answered Mr. Hay promptly.
| is not your attitude that of defending
an opinion
| Yes, sir"
This concluded the cross-examina ton
and Mr.. Hay was excused
Alrrt NJ. IIinman of Worcester, anoth-
cr handwriting expert. then took tn.
stand. lie said ihat after examining the
Merton ad,!l css he found in it three dis
| tinct Slants. He also found many charac-
terSlics in il not found in the standards
| OF fuckers writing.
| Mr. Hinman said that the person who
| wrote Charicstown on the sales Slips
| which are conceded 10 be the standard
did not write the word charlestown i'll
conn rctinn with the Morton address.
| The subject apparently failed 70 inter
esat tne spectators and before Mr.. Hin
| man had been long on the stand there
| were large number of vacant chairs.
| He was Stiil testifying when the midday
| recess was taken.
| When court came in for the afternoon
session. Mr. lInman resumed his evidence
| regarding the characteristics of the Nor
| ton and Page notes. lie used ii black
| board 10 illustrate his remarks.
Mr.. llinman's testimony during the first
| hour OF the afternoon was extremely tech
meal, relating to the formation of the
different letters and combinations Of let
| t.rS appearing in the Morton note, thc
Page note and the STANDARDS OF Tuckers :
| hamdW riting.
Witness said the author of the sales
| slips WAS not TIL" person who wrote the
| In reply to.a question by Mr.. Vahey,
witness laid he was thoroughly convinced
| that Mabel Page wrote Ihe Morton ad-
dress. attorney General Parker then be-
gan his INSTRUMENTATION.
| can You say why. if YOU were search
ing simply for the truth" said ne 'yoH
did not point out the Simla liIy between
| fuckers writing and the Morton note in
Your demons trtti"n to The jlE EN?
II Just didn't happen TO- replied Mi
Iiinman.
The witness quickly became confused
under Mi. Prakcr's sharp questions ana
attempted I" make ,ong tNpihnaiI"ns. lie
said the Page writing and the Morton
note showed marked habits but OF a diff
ferent siyle.
How DO you prove simlarites by dis
simiarities? 1t that your meth"d?'' ask
ed the attorney general.
For two o.! three minutes witnesses at
tempted to evadc the question. but Mr..
Parker finally made him answer Yes, |
believe 50
.All you claim is that your opinion
! upon further investigation might knock
down every one of the conclusions you
have built up. is it not
"pon't you think so?"
"Well. everything L. possible
TIL" a!tor1ty general asked the witness
| about his ability as a writer. Mr.. Hinman
| lrpli"d that he could write any way h"
"Then;' was the quick observance of
Mr.. Parker. lit was only vour virtue that
| saved the community from forgery"
Witness laughed as he said, Yes, per-
haps So
At the request of the attorney general.
Mr.. Hinman produced on The blackboard
| the word "Charleston'' as written by
Tucker in the standards used at the trial
Then Mr.. Parker asked:
could You tell by analysis who wrote
| that wCrd. forgetting at the time you
had amy knowledge of it?'
The question seemed to puzzle The wit
,a, res and q; me attorney ger, general lnt it in
h. could.
Doesn't that leave your conclusions a
Il don't believe SO. not TO my mind
anyway" was the answer
Mr. Hinman was told to assume that
the Morton and Page notes Were written
by the same person under the same con
dtinnS as nearly alike possible Hav-
ing. assumed this. he was asked TO ex-
nlair the manifest differences shown in
the Handwriting of the two notes. He said
he was unable to ho so.
Mr.. llinman admitted that he found
hind, letters in fuckers as we'll as in
Miss Pages writing, but he considered
| them insignificant. Witness admitted
that his method of demonstration was to
look Tor simiarties. He admitted he dis
covered dSsimilarities also.
Then" said the attorney general las
matter of fact You have not demnnstrat-
| all n matter of choice. is it not
Witness replied that that was tr,le
This completed the croSS-examinatjon
| of the witness and court adjourned until
tomorrow morning.