New-York tribune., 1906-12-27
EXPERTS ON THE STAND
Conflicting Testimony on Hand5rrit-
ing IN Mann Trial

After an adjournment over Christmas Day
the trial OF Colonel William Dalton Mann for
perjury was resumed yesterday IN Part of
General Sessions. before Recorder Goff. The
DAY was spent in the examination Of hand
writing experts, whose testimony conficted in
many points
Niaruh W. Litteton. counsel for the defence.
got Decker to say that the material for COM
pAllson OF handwriting In the case was meagre,
anu anu 'hst ne would like to have more exhibits.
Wi'ness said that he was not anxious to tes-
Chy IN phe case. and then told how much he
hao been paid for testifying in the Patrick.
Kennedy and Molneux cases He said that he
expected to get paid for testifying in this case.
AFTER few more questions had been asked by
AR. LittletoD Decker left the stand.
Nr. Garvan read portions Of the record of the
Norman Hapgood trial, in which Colonel Mann
testified. He said that the statements made by
him were false. He knew" Mr. Garvan con-
unued, when he said that the editorial columns
OF Town Topics were not for sale. that IL
he had admitted that those columns were
tor sale. the libel suit against Hapgood would
Immediately fail" This, said the Assistant Dis
trlct Attorney, showed motive for false swear
ing Mr.. Ltttleton objected to the introduction
taken.
During recess Mr. Littleton said that he IS
tended TO go fully into the for the defence.
and had no idea Of cutting IL short merely to get
through the case. When his attention was
called TO the fact that Recorder Goff leaves the
recorders bench and goes to the Supreme Court
bench at midnight next Monday, and that there
was danger Of mistrial sc the case was not
Hhlsneo perore that time. he said that he
thought the case would probably be finished In
time.
Walter C. shoup. attorney for Count Reginald
Ward. was the next witness called by Mr. Gar
van. He identified a number of letters which
he had received from MIR. Ward.
Clarence Foot was the next witness. He said
he h0d Owr,sT,n
MS opinion the same hand wrote the 90 K, w
D. NJ, on the Count Reginald Ward letter,
known as Exhibit 64. that wrote "W. D. NJ"
EXHIBITS admitted to be in the defendants hand
writing. He said that he testified for the de-
fence IN the Molineux case and for the people
in the Patrick case.
Foot said that he did not know which exhibit
was under dispute until he had examined them
all and pronounced them all 20 have been writ
discussion on the characteristics of handwriting.
Witness said that the ''K' in Exhibit "a was
like all the others in various exhibits not in dis
pute.
Frederick f Bertine, paying teller Of the
Fifth National Bank was the next witness.
When he saw Exhibit 81 he said that he thought
that the 20. K" and ''W. D. NJ were written in
Colonel Mann's handwriting Bertine testified
that the defendant was depostor in the Fifth
mitted that he had Withdrawn his account in
1854. a recess was taken at p. for one
Before taking an adjournment for night
session, Recorder GofR told the Jurors that
Ing to the peculiar position in which the court
found itself by being obliged to finish the
before the close Of the year, he would have to
ask them to make sacrifice Of their time and
sit at night. He then asked them If they could
90 home and be back in a couple Of hours.
Most OF the Jurors said that they could not, and
then the Recorder ordered q recess until 7:15
o'clock.
On resuming the trial Mr.. Zehe continued
his testimony. The witness stated that no bank
ing institution In the country did business upon
initials a signature. but that all drafts and
C1,a Ire ND 0Tfpp HO0l1 q f.
tached the full name OF the negotiator. The
witness said that he could not determine that
the ''VV" IN Exhibit "a was ''W'' without COM
pairing Il with other "W's."
The other experts examined were George W.
Manerd, treasurer OF the Title Insurance Com
pany, and Charles r Barn.