Disputed Handwriting | Page 7

genuineness of the signature, and
without knowledge of the party to whom the payment is made, or some
accompanying circumstance or circumstances tending to inspire
confidence in the good faith of the transaction. In that aspect, the
danger of deception as to the genuineness of signatures loses most of its
terrors.
It is one of the recognized rules of court to admit as admissible
testimony, the opinions of experts, whether the whole or any specified
portion of an instrument was, or was not written by the same hand, with
the same ink, and at the same time, which question arises when an
addition to, or alteration of, an instrument is charged. It must be
recollected that at this time It is a very easy matter for experienced
forgers and rascals to so prepare ink that it may appear to the eye to be
of the age required, and it is next to impossible for any expert to give
any information in regard to the age of a certain writing. In many
instances experts have easily detected the kind of ink employed, and

have also successfully shown the falsity of testimony that the whole of
a writing in controversy was executed at the same time, and with the
same ink.
James D. Peacock, a London barrister, who has given considerable time
and study to disputed handwritings, lays great stress upon the ability of
determining the genuineness or falsity of a writing by what he calls its
"anatomy" or "skeleton." He says that some persons in making
successive strokes, make the turn from one to another sharply angular,
while others make it rounded or looping. Writings produced in both
ways appear the same to the eye, but under a magnifying glass the
difference in the mode of executing is shown. As illustrating that point,
he makes the following statement in respect to a case involving the
genuineness of the alleged signature of an old man whose handwriting
was fine and tremulous:
"On making a magnified copy of the signature, I found that the
tremulous appearance of the letters was due to the fact that they were
made up of a series of dashes, standing at varying angles with each
other, and further, that these strokes, thus enlarged, were precisely like
these constituting the letters in the body of the note, which were
acknowledged to have been written by the alleged forger of the note.
Upon the introduction of this testimony the criminal withdrew the plea
of not guilty and implored the mercy of the court."
As one means of determining whether the whole of a writing was
executed at the same time, and with the same ink, or at different times,
and with different inks, Mr. Peacock further says that the photographic
process is very effective because it not only copies the forms of letters
but takes notice of differences in the color of two inks which are
inappreciable by the eye. He states that:
"Where there is the least particle of yellow present in a color, the
photograph will take notice of the fact by making the picture blacker,
just in proportion as the yellow predominates, so that a very light
yellow will take a deep black. So any shade of green, or blue, or red,
where there is an imperceptible amount of yellow, will pink by the
photographic process more or less black, while either a red or blue

varying to a purple, will show more or less paint as the case may be."
As to deception which the eye will not detect, in regard to the age of
paper, he says:
"I have repeatedly examined papers which have been made to appear
old by various methods, such as washing with coffee, with tobacco, and
by being carried in the pocket, near the person, by being smoked or
partially burned, and in various other ways. I have in my possession a
paper which has passed the ordeal of many examinations by experts
and others, which purports to be two hundred years old, and to have
been saved from the Boston fire. The handwriting is a perfect
fac-simile of that of Thomas Addington, the town clerk of Boston, two
hundred years ago, and yet the paper is not over two years old."
The most remarkable case of deception to the eye, even when aided by
magnifying glasses, is in determining when two pen strokes cross each
other, which stroke was made first. Mr. Peacock does not explain how
the deception is possible, but that it occurs as matter of fact, he shows
by an account of a very decisive experiment. Taking ten different kinds
of ink, most commonly on sale, he drew lines on a piece of paper in
such a way as to produce a hundred points of crossing and so that