El Nuevo mexicano., 1916-06-01

leu tNM.HA.N .44M NTA NHA.
Then there followed a humorous
exchange OF remarks. Judge Wright
asked the Witness whether he had
ever studied typewriters, and DR..
Ewell replied: II have studied their
work, but I have never been a me-
chanic, a typewriter salesman, an
operator, nor have I taught a type
writer school" He added, later on
in his testimony, that he never rad
sufficient money to manufacturer
typewriters and therefore he may
have missed certain items about
their construction.
Piled with questions by Judge
Wright about the Underwood ma
chine and its ~peculiarities, the wit
ness admitted that he had never
studied the machine as far as its con-
struction goes. Asked whether 1t is
not true that there may be defects
in an entire series of machines, DR..
EWell said: Eyes, there may be-; no
two machines are exactly alike"
Asked whether there may not be a
"~congenitaly defect, he said: 1T
might be in the type" The witness
then explained that a defect in the
type could be traced when an impress
sion from that type was made on wax.
But when made through a constantly
moving ribbon, Of constantly chang
ing texture, and possible change in
ink, the Impression was bound to
vary. Asked whether he considered
defects in type not apparent to the
naked eye of mo value in disputed
document cases, the witness replied:
II did not say so. | say merely that
I'd hesitate to come to a decision"
Not An Exact Science Z
DR.. Ewell admitted that identifi-
cation of typewriting has not yet be-
come an exact science. "All / can ex-
press" he said, "is an opinion. But
opinions vary in force"
He was asked about the space oc-
cupied by letters Of the Underwood
typewriter and replied promptly to
various questions of how many let
tiers can be written in an inch.
Asked when the Underwood Type
writer company had changed its type,
the witness said he did not know
just when the change had been made.
Various Imperfections
Coming down to the imperfections
noticed in ~typewritfng, DR.. Ewell said
that he would class as organic
those i~mperfections in writing due
to type that really had gross de-
fects and that had suffered a change
in slant; as "symptomatic or physio-
logic he would call the other little
imperfections noticed by the trained
naked eye or through the microscope.
What kind Of a machine documents
we're written on was immaterial to
the examiner of typewriter docu-
ments, he declared; the essential
point for Identification was "the num-
Der of glazing resemblances due to
imperfections of an organic charac-
ter"
Judge Wright was not particularly
successful in ~pinning DR.. Ewell down
to an enunciation Of his system of
diagnosis of these typewriter ills.
How many defects, Doctor, would
have to be common to say that two
documents were written on the same
asked the attorney.
THAT would depend on the case"
answered the witness.
How much matter would you have
to have for examination"
THAT would depend on the circum-
Stances replied the handwriting ex-
pert.
Most Common Defects
Further examination of the witness
led to the explanation that the most
defects used by a typewrit-
ing expert in Identification of docu-
nents are the knocking off of the
edges of the letter IN" and the
breaking off Of the top Of the 'ser-
lphv of the letter "r." But when this
'seraph'' is rounded into a knob, it is
lot common. For a basis of compare
ION, the witness explained that these
ire the four constituents:
/. The design of the letter.
2. Presentation of defects.
3, Alignment.
A.. Slant.
Nov, then. which is the most sat
sfactory identification?" pursued
Judge Wright.
Defects in type and variation from
alignment" replied DR..
DWELL. ''That is what Mr.. Osborn
avs In his book on typewriter docu-
nents; and | agree with him"
Congenital Defects of Type
Judge Wright was not satisfied. He
.sked the witness whether he did
believe that it is possible in a
typewriter factory that a matrix, from
which the type for the typebars is
asst, may suffer a 'congenital' de-
ect, influencing all of the type cast
rom that matrix. In other words, is
not possible that a deformed letter
nay appear on an entire series Of
ypewriters? May not the letter "w,"
rhich showed an unusual knob at the
Dp in the alleged spurious docu-
presented in court, have been
he innocent victim of a defective
which carried the birth
lark knob on to other "w" S?
DR.. Ewell replied bluntly that he
consider a manufacturer who
-ould put out a series of typewriters
18th such a defect to be either a
)ol or a knave."
Judge Wright dropped the subject
u the moment.
Ribbons Have Effect
DR.. Ewell admitted that the four
,tters brought in as exhibits in the
ase showed different typewriter rib
Dns from the letters written in
& Woods Office and those
sed as comparisons. He said fur
Ter that the letters also showed