The weekly times-record. (Valley City, N.D.) 1912-1922, 1922-02-09

nature of the case. he INFORMED MT.
Wattam that he could not give an
opinion on the handwriting without
the presentation of more specimens.
He was then furnished with various
letters and postal cards entered in ev-
idence by the state and compare them
with the signature of James Farrell
on the hotel register sheet. The wit
ness stated that
Brown Signed Jas. Farrell
"My opinion IS that one and the
same person wrote all specimens ex-
| amined including the signature
flames Farrell' on the register sheet
Mr.. Cation stated that it was neces-
sary to have abundance of specimens
for comparison in case of disputed
hand writing. These testimonies must
be undisputed samples of the hand
writing Of the person suspected. A
black board was brought into the
court room for the purpose of dem
onstrating methods of expert COM
parison. Mr.. Cation said "In the hand
writing in dispute there are several
letters which do not follow the math-
ematical standard for hand writing.
The witness said that the notable
letters in the signature Of James
Farrell and the specimens examined
are the letters "r-s-f-w and the COM
binations RI and clip, these letters
showing a striking similarity between
the signature of James Farrell and
the different words in the specimens
presented. The "R's" are exception
ally we'll made when used in the CEN
ter of words but the writer had evil
IDENTIFY formed the habit Of completing
Il word with a horizontal stroke in
stead of right curve and this APP
piled in the undisputed hand writing
of Brown as it also contains stroke
which may be called an eccentric
stroke, the intail stroke extending
across the entire field Of the letter.
This capital wv" in Willmar and 9TH
er words in the writing Of Brown
show a striking similarity. The small
letter IS" is described by the wit
ness as being formed in an unusual
manner which is almost Identical:
when superimposed on the undisputed
handwriting with the IS" as written
by Brown.
Cross Examination Tomorrow
The witness Cation was excused
without cross examination today.
Counsel for defense desires time in
which to study his testimony in re-
gard to specimens of hand writing
and advised him that he would be re-
called for cross examination tomor-
row.
Fred Lawrence was returned to the
stand and questioned briefly as to the
occupant of room Al before being
turned over to Bartlett for cross ex-
animation. Lawrence stated that
May Melaas did not make up room 40
the morning following the murder.
When questioned regarding his con-
versation with the accused when they
looked over the transom of room 81,
the witness reiterated his previous
testimony. Barnett asked Lawrence
if he had made up or counted the
cash in the till on the morning follow
ing the tragedy but the witness said
he did not rember whether he had
or not and that he did not remember
GUNNER telling him that he had been
required to make change during the
night, using two dollars of his own.
The witness did not remember this
but did not deny it. Asked as to his
conversation with May Melaas on the
morning following the murder he sta
ted that he had asked Miss eMlaas
if she had heard any noise during the
night and she told him that she had
not. Under redirect examination he