New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1905-05-17

yenient to use them. TWAS not at his Ia
that the pages were cut out. t
..In looking over the book carefully, !
lid you see anything in it that would
lead you to believe that the hand that Il
wrote on them was the one that wrote h
the word Sampler asked Mr.. Pau 4
on redirect. |
81 object to comparison with any
samples of handwriting not in evil
dence,'' said Gen. Childs
ssThe objection is sustained" said the
court.
"Do you find anything in the writing
on the label that leads you to believe
that the handwriting was disguised?'
Nothing whatever
z. ST did not understand that you claim
to be infalible in comparing nandwrit-
ing, did I, Professor" asked Gen.
Childs.
Like yourself, I am not" replied
Professor Curtiss, smiling.
The recess was here taken.
Mankato Experts Called.
W. w. Davis Jr., cashier of the Man
kato Savings Bank, was sworn. lie was
shown the various exhibits OF Dir.
Koch's handwriting and said that he
had examined them last evening. He
was shown the label on the bottle and
said that he mad also seen and eXamln-
ed it with and without magnifying
glass
"In my opinion there is no similar
the writing on the bottle and on the
sheets.
Cross examined, the witness said that
his duties mostly require him to COM
pare signatures. Do not remember that
[ was ever called upon in the bank to
compare any writing except signatures
The papers were examined last evening
by Prof. Brandrup, John R. Thomas and
!, myself, Prof. Curtiss and the attorneys
for the defense l was there about al
hour. and examined the papers abou
. fifteen minutes.
s'Would the word on the ledger sheet
be written with free hand?" aske'
Gen. Childs.
eyes, SIR
"Would the word "Sample," if writ
ten on the label after it was on the bot
tie, be written with free hand?"
OCCASIONALLY So"
John R. Thomas, cashier of the Man
kato State Bank, was called.
IS GLOW long nave you lived in Maj
l. kato?" asked Mr.. Pfau. ..
II "Forty years." replied the witnes
in care you a married MANI" asked tt
y, attorney with smile.
t. ''No, sir"
1e The smile was taking, and rapid
ne went through the audience, and the wi
x ness participated in it, flushing slight
er The witness said that he saw and e,
y amined the writing exhibits last ev
n ming, and enumerated who were pre-
I'D ent. -.
'My opinion is that the wo
nd Sample on the bottle and the wor
in on the other exhibits were not writt
re by the safe person." said Mr.. Thoms
d Cross examined by Mr.. Wilson, t
witness said that his experience W
mostly in comparing signatures. ]
It's had signature book, but went most
Ire by memory. Never claimed to be
Ter expert in handwriting. See no simils
?" ity between the letters on the bot
and those on the other exhibits. .
er- Prof j. R. Brandrup, one of t
proprietors of the Mankato Commerc
ote College, was called. Have made nal
5he writing a study for sixteen or seve
on teen years, and made comparison
handwriting a study for the sal
de- length of time. The witness was sho7
lot the exhibits and said that he had co
to pared and examined them last event
ur- very carefully, using a glass.
US II don't think that the writing on
on bottle was made by the person who
ag- the writing on the Sheets said the W
u.s. ness, replying to question.
the The witness explained the ditfere
ur in the formation of the letters,
lew which he had arrived at his opini
ore The greatest difference was found
the 'm,' round turns being made
the the bottom in the letter on the bot
ury The letter was made with one stro
and one of the downward strokes
an repeated quarter of the way do
The "p'' was also quite different.
in writing has some similarity. The Sc
hat made in different ways on the defe
was ants exhibits, and some of them
lt?" similar to the sc" in Sample"
ending of the Sc" is somewhat sim
wit in some cases and in som cit is not.