By kind permission of Messrs. Macmillan & Co., Ltd.
The various patterns may, as a rule, be classified into the three main groups of arches, loops and whorls, while some of the transitional forms may be grouped under more than one of these heads. Other patterns, again, which are of rare occurrence, are not suitable for inclusion in any of the three groups.
A system of indexing based upon this method of classification was also devised in which letters represented the varieties of patterns. Thusa, a, aindicate that the outline upon the fore, middle and ring fingers consists of arches, whilea, w, lindicate an arch upon the forefinger, a whorl upon the middle finger, and a loop upon the ring finger. The lettersiandoare also used, the former indicating a loop with an inward slope and the latter one with an outer slope upon the forefinger.
The possible variations in such a classification of the impressions of the three fingers of the right hand cannot exceed thirty-six, and a thousand prints may therefore be indexed into one of these thirty-six groups. Subdivisions of these main groups may then be based upon the characteristics of the prints of the fingers of the other hand and of the thumbs, while differences in the cores of the patterns afford a means of forming smaller divisions of the loop patterns.
From observations of the 5,000 prints of 500 individuals Sir Francis Galton found that arches were present in 6·5 per cent.; loops in 67·5 per cent.; andwhorls in 26·0 per cent. Each digit and hand, however, had its own peculiarities, and the variations in the percentage of arches upon different digits ranged from 1 to 17; that of the loops from 53 to 90; and that of the whorls from 13 to 45.
Loops occurred with most frequency upon the little finger and then upon the middle finger, while whorls were rarely met with upon these fingers, but were of common occurrence upon the thumb and ring finger.
The classification employed by the English police was devised by Sir Edward Henry and is a modification of that of Sir Francis Galton, from which it differs in making use of four types instead of three. The impressions are grouped into arches, loops, whorls, and composites. The last group includes patterns made up of combinations of the other three, or those which might be classified either as loops or whorls. There are also numerous subdivisions of the group into patterns with characteristics in common such as “central pockets” and “accidentals,” and further differentiation is effected by counting the number of ridges between two fixed points in the patterns.
Examples of these four groups are shown in the plate facingp. 66.
Dr. Faulds, who, while at a hospital in Japan, made an exhaustive study of the finger impressions of the Japanese, appears to have been the first to suggest the possibility of tracing a criminal by the imprints of his fingers upon external objects.
He mentions two instances where the method hadafforded valuable evidence, and these are worth recording as early examples of the use of the system in detective work.
TYPES OF FINGER PRINTS
In one case some rectified spirit had been drunk, and the greasy marks of the fingers upon the bottle plainly showed who was the culprit, for their pattern was identical with that of an imprint in Dr. Fauld’s collection.
On another occasion someone had been suspected of breaking into a house, but the sooty imprints of fingers left upon the wall proved beyond all doubt that this was not the person.
The finger-print system of identification was adopted by the police in this country in July, 1901, and the numbers of identifications made since then by the police at Scotland Yard are very remarkable. Up to the end of 1901 there were 93 identifications, which rose in the succeeding years to the following numbers: In 1902, 1,722; in 1903, 3,642; in 1904, 5,155; in 1905, 6,186; in 1906, 6,776; in 1907, 7,701; in 1908, 9,440; and in 1909, 9,960.
There have been some very striking instances of the detection of criminals by means of their finger-prints, a few of which may be quoted by way of illustration.
On March 20, 1908, a man named Chadwick was tried at the Birmingham Assizes on the charge of housebreaking and stealing at Edgbaston. He had left finger-prints upon a champagne bottle, and when these were made clear by the application of powdered blacklead they were found to correspond exactly with the finger-prints of the prisoner. InspectorCollins, in giving evidence on this point, stated that there were a million and a quarter classified finger-prints at Scotland Yard, and that these could all be distinguished from one another. He pointed out that there were twelve ridges which were characteristic and identical in the two prints.
Similar identifications in cases of burglary have been made by means of the impressions left on a wax candle, on windows, on paper, such as a cheque, or on the metallic surface of a cash-box, etc.
On March 11th of last year, a labourer named George Lane was put on trial at Birmingham on the charge of breaking into the house of a bootmaker and stealing several articles. He had left a thumb-nail mark upon a glove-box, and evidence was given as to the identity of this with his own thumb-print. For the defence it was urged that he was in Nottingham at the time, and that he could call as a witness “a tall dark man working in a bar.” The judge offered to postpone the trial for the attendance of this witness, but warned the prisoner that if his statement were found to be untrue he would be prosecuted for perjury in addition to the present charge. The prisoner thereupon said he preferred the trial not to be delayed. He was found guilty, and after evidence of previous convictions had been given he was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude.
In April of last year an equally convincing proof was offered of the value of the finger-print system, when it proved the identity of a dead man. The scattered remains of this man were found upon the railway line near Slough, and there was no clue whatever as to hisidentity. Upon the off-chance of the victim’s finger-prints being known at Scotland Yard impressions from his fingers were taken by the local superintendent of the police and forwarded to headquarters, where on reference to the index of finger-prints they were immediately recognised. They were those of a man twenty-four years of age, who had been living at Deal.
This was noteworthy as being the first occasion upon which the method has been used to discover the identity of anyone after death.
A striking proof of the value of finger-prints in the identification of an individual by the French police was afforded last year in Paris.
A man named Lemarque, one of a notorious gang of thieves, known as Chaffeurs de la Drome, had escaped when three of his companions had been captured. They were tried at the Assize Court of the Drome Department in July, 1909, on the charges of murder and robbery and were condemned to death, while Lemarque was sentenced by default.
All attempts to discover the missing man proved fruitless, until in March, 1910, a man was arrested for theft at Nîmes. He gave the name of Charles Garnier, but the police suspecting that the description he gave of himself was false, took impressions of his finger-prints, and forwarded these, together with the man’s description and photograph, to the Anthropometrical Department of the Prefecture of Police in Paris. The finger-prints were immediately recognised by M. Bertillon, and Charles Garnier was identified as Lemarque, the man who had so long been “wanted.”
IDENTIFICATION AND HANDWRITING
Heredity—Emotional Influences—Effects of Disease on Handwriting.
Heredity—Emotional Influences—Effects of Disease on Handwriting.
The identification of an individual solely by means of his handwriting is always liable to lead to a miscarriage of justice, for even in the cases of the closest resemblance between two writings there can be no certainty on this point. In the following pages I have attempted to point out under what varying conditions handwriting may show alterations and thus lead to wrong conclusions.
In the making of handwriting heredity plays a very important part, just as it does in the characteristic gait and the little mannerisms which are peculiar to each individual. In addition to this, the writing may be modified by the results of training and other external influences.
It is obviously not possible to determine from which ancestors all the features in one’s handwriting are inherited, just as it is impossible to trace the origin of certain obviously inherited traits of character. At the same time, instances in which close resemblances may be noticed between the handwriting of a man and that of his father and grandfather will occur to everyone. Thus a particular slope in the direction of the writing or a mode of looping the letters or of forming certain words may be passed on from generation to generation.
HEREDITY IN HANDWRITING
A remarkable fact in this connection is that there is frequently a tendency for a son to inherit certain characteristics in the father’s writing and for the daughters’ writing to resemble more closely that of their mother than that of their father.
The examples shown in the figure illustrate this tendency. The words were all written by members of one family, the first two lines being those of the father and the mother. The third, fifth, eighth and ninth lines were written by their daughters, and the fourth, sixth and seventh lines by their sons.
It will be noticed among other points of resemblance that the bold characteristic looping of the letter L in the mother’s handwriting is reproduced more or less closely in the writing of all the daughters, while the sons form the same letter with a small loop, as in the word written by their father. The angles at which the different words are written also show the effect of this “parallel heredity,” as it might be termed.
While possessing such points of resemblance obviously inherited from the parents’ handwriting, the writing of each of the children also shows characteristics of its own that distinguish it from the writings of the others—characteristics partly inherited from other ancestors and partly the result of environment.
So close, however, is the resemblance between the handwriting of the father and of the eldest son that on more than one occasion one has been mistaken for the other by other members of the family.
The normal handwriting of every individual is affected by very many external influences, the term “normal” being used here to describe writing that isdone when the thoughts of the writer are being concentrated upon what is being written and without a mental side-glance at the form of the writing itself.
In the latter case various psychological influences cause the writing to vary more or less. For instance, the handwriting of an artist may show marked variations at different periods, especially in the form of the capital letters; for the artist usually keeps before his eye the decorative effect of his letters and words, and is constantly making experimental changes in his writing.
In like manner, handwriting is often influenced to a considerable extent by sub-conscious memories of the writing of other people, especially of those whom the writer tries to imitate in other respects. In some individuals this unintentional imitation of other handwriting is so pronounced that they are unable to answer any letter without its characters having some effect upon their own writing.
Conscious imitation is a still more frequent influence upon the form of writing and some of its effects may become fixed characteristics.
Instances of this are to be seen in the “good” writing of the old-fashioned writing-master, whose ideal was the copper-plate engraving of the visiting card with its thick down-stroke and thin up-stroke and absolute regularity of letter; in the pointed Italian writing, taught generally in mid-Victorian ladies’ schools; in the Civil Service “hand” set as a standard for securing marks in examination; and in modern commercial handwriting now rapidly giving place to the typewriter.
An instance which illustrates the manner in which a writing-school will turn out hundreds of pupils all writing in the same manner is shown in the accompanying figure, for which I am indebted to Mr. W. J. Kinsley, of New York. The members of a class in the Packhard Business School at New York, numbering about forty young men and girls ranging from sixteen to twenty years of age, were all told to write the samewords: “This is a specimen of my writing,” without any directions being given them and without knowing for what purpose it was wanted. The results obtained, some of which are here shown, were published in a paper in New York. The striking resemblance among them all is obvious at the first glance, and when these specimens first appeared a lawyer wrote to the editor complaining that an attempt had been made to pass off the handwriting of one person as having been done by several.
Influence of training on handwriting
Each of these lines was written by a different person
The writing of the writing school is no more the real writing of the individual than laborious printing in capitals would be.
Even when what must be regarded as the vicious style of the writing school has been so thoroughly acquired that the writer ceases to be conscious that he is copying a model, the writing not infrequently reverts to a normal state and will then tend to show indications of inherited traits.
Under ordinary conditions, where there has been no prolonged attention given to the form of the writing, as in conscious imitation or experimental alteration, and but little unconscious imitation, certain distinctive features may persist for a very long period. Thus the angle at which the writing slopes may remain practically the same for years, or the form of a particular slope beneath a signature will repeat itself almost exactly time after time, and even the absence of a flourish may become a significant characteristic.
Emotional influences often have an effect upon handwriting, though the alterations thus produced are frequently only slight and temporary. Thus aman weighed down by overwhelming grief will often write in smaller characters than usual, while violent anger will find its expression in more vigorous cross strokes to the “t’s,” heavier dotting of the “i’s,” and the thickness of a flourish to a signature. On the other hand, slight changes caused by long-continued depression may leave permanent traces upon the handwriting.
A deeply interesting historical instance of this tendency of handwriting to vary with the mood of the writer is to be seen in the signatures of Napoleon at various periods of his career. Several of these written on occasions calling forth widely differing emotions are here reproduced, and it is not difficult to discern in some of them the effect of emotional influence. Very striking, for instance, is the difference between the orderly signature written after the victory at Austerlitz and the blotted scrawl dashed off after the defeat at Leipzig. Nor will it escape notice that nearly all the signatures written at moments of depression or failure have a downward slant, whereas that of the victor of Austerlitz runs upwards. A great contrast, too, is shown between the general features of the first three signatures penned in moments of triumph or success, with that written on the retreat from Russia and the still less assertive signature of the prisoner of St. Helena.
Instances of the effects of passing emotions upon writing might be multiplied indefinitely, but what has been said above is sufficient to show that this factor is of importance in drawing any conclusions as to the identity of an individual from his handwriting.
SIGNATURES OF NAPOLEON AT DIFFERENT PERIODS OF HIS CAREER
If passing emotions can have so great an influence upon handwriting, how much greater must be the effect when the centre or centres in the brain that control the writing mechanism are affected or destroyed by disease!
Among the disturbances of handwriting due to defective control of the muscles we may include the so-calledtremor-writing, which is common in old age, and the writing of people suffering from writers’ cramp, an example of which is shown in the figure.
Writers’ Cramp
Other forms of defective writing may be the result of a paralytic stroke affecting the writing centre of the brain, which causes the patient either to form only parts of letters or endlessly to repeat the same letter under the impression that sentences are being formed, while in extreme cases there may be merely a succession of meaningless strokes in place of written characters.
Specimen of Agraphia
The writing of insane people almost invariably shows the effect of mental disturbance. In some casesthe form of the letters is changed, but they are still used in their right places. An illustration of this is given in the accompanying figure, which represents the signatures of the poet Lenau before and during his insanity.
Writing of Lenau, the poet, before and during insanity
In other instances there is both alteration in the form of the writing andparagraphia, or the use of the wrong letters. Thus Hölderlin, the German poet, who became harmlessly insane in 1806 at the age of thirty-six, ever afterwards misspelled his name in the manner here shown.
Signature of Hölderlin before and during insanity
A very interesting derangement of writing, which is probably due to the writing centre in one hemisphere of the brain becoming adapted to do the work of that in the other, is that commonly known asmirrorwriting. An example of this which came under the writer’s observation is shown below.
This shows the ordinary handwriting of a working woman of about sixty-six, who for the last three years has been paralysed in the right arm, and since then has produced mirror writing with her left hand.
Mirror writing in paralysis
The most remarkable instance of mirror writing on record is to be seen in the last manuscript of Leonardo da Vinci, known as theCodex Atlanticus, in the library at Milan. Various speculations have been made as to why backward writing should have been employed here, but the obvious explanation may be deduced from the letter of a monk, Antonio de Beatis, who, after visiting Leonardo in his retirement at Amboise, wrote that the artist would never paint again, as his right arm was paralysed. The manuscript was in all probability, therefore, written with the left hand, and, as frequently happens in such cases of paralysis, the other hypothetical writing centre was brought into action and mirror writing was produced.
Of all the temporary influences tending to modify handwriting none is more remarkable, or affords a better proof of the way in which written characters vary with the condition of the mind than the effect of hypnotic suggestion.
The experiments of Professors Lombroso and Richet have proved that a suggested change of personality is accompanied by an appropriate style in the handwriting of the subject. Thus, a young hysterical girl when hypnotised under the suggestion that she was a child wrote in childish characters.
Still more striking were their experiments upon a young Austrian student, Chiarloni Clementino, who within little more than an hour was made to assume successively the characters of a child, of Napoleon, of Garibaldi, of a clerk, and of an old man of ninety. He was made to write some words on each of his assumed characters, and the writings not only differed to a marked extent from his normal handwriting, but also had characteristics suggestive of the type of individual he was temporarily personating.
The results of some of these experiments, which the present writer had the permission of the late Professor Lombroso to reproduce, are shown in the accompanying figures. The normal writing of the student is represented below, while Fig. A (p. 82) shows words written under the suggestion that he was Napoleon, Fig. B, his writing as the old man of ninety, and Fig. C that done as Garibaldi.
A. As Napoleon
B. As an old man
C. As Garibaldi.
HYPNOTIC HANDWRITING
The handwritings of the suggested Napoleon and Garibaldi were quite different from the writing of the real individuals, although it is interesting to note that there is some attempt to form the letters of Garibaldi’s signature in the same manner as in the genuine signature here shown.
In a private letter to the present writer Lombroso mentioned that it was quite possible for the hypnotised student to have been familiar with the signature of Garibaldi. Or, again, the hypnotisers may have had their thoughts upon the form of the genuine signature while the student was writing the suggested version of it.
It has been observed by Dr. Preyer that certain individuals, when under hypnotic influence, write in a better handwriting than when they are in their normal condition, whereas in the case of other subjects the letters are childish and badly formed. It is even possible to make them omit by suggestion particular letters from each word they write, “Europe,” for instance, becoming “Urop,” and so on, while by further suggestion they may be induced to make use again of the missing letters.
The fact that handwriting may be completely altered under the influence of hypnotism is not only of great scientific interest, but may also have an important bearing on the results of legal cases in which handwriting is concerned.
It was pointed out some years ago by Dr. Bianchi that hysterical women are particularly prone to write anonymous letters, and it is well known that such women are readily responsive to hypnotic suggestion.
Facts such as these suggest how necessary it may often be to take into account the possibility of hypnotic influence before deciding upon the authorship of a given piece of writing.
The extent to which a man should be held responsible for what has been written as the result of hypnotic suggestion from another person will obviously depend upon whether he was the dupe or the willing instrument of the hypnotiser. In any case it may not be easy to prove that the writing is his, for it will probably be very different from his ordinary handwriting.
Hitherto no case of criminal libel involving such delicate questions as these appears to have come before the courts, but it is one that might conceivably occur at any time, and a jury would then have to decide upon the responsibility of the writer.
EVIDENCE AS TO HANDWRITING
Illustrative Cases—Handwriting Experts
Illustrative Cases—Handwriting Experts
At one time the only evidence that was allowed to be given as to handwriting was that of the writer himself, or of someone who had seen the writing done, or was well acquainted with the handwriting in question.
Examples of evidence of this kind are numerous and occur in many of the cases mentioned in other parts of this book, such as the trial of Spencer Cowper in 1699, or of that of the Perreaus in 1775.
In the trial of Spencer Cowper (1699) an important part of the defence was that the girl had drowned herself in a fit of depression, and letters written by her were put forward to prove this view.
A gentleman named Marshall produced letters that he had received from her, and a man named Beale gave evidence that he believed it to be in her handwriting, having seen her write and holding a receipt of hers.
The jury declared they were satisfied with the evidence, but the judge (Baron Hatsell) remarked that they might ask the mother to say whether it was her daughter’s handwriting.
Sarah Stout’s brother was also questioned.
Mrs. Stout.—How should I know! I know she was no such person; her hand may be counterfeited.
The Judge.—But if it were written in her more sober style, what would you say then?
Mrs. Stout.—I shan’t say it to be her hand unless I saw her write it.
Mr. Stout.—It is like my sister’s hand.
The Judge.—Do you believe it to be her hand?
Mr. Stout.—No, I don’t believe it; because it don’t suit her character.
The judge in his summing up remarked that if the jury believed that the letters were in the handwriting of Sarah Stout there was evidence to show that although she was a virtuous woman a distemper might have turned her brains, and discomposed her mind.
The history of the admission of expert evidence on handwriting in this country is a curious one, and shows that opinion has long been divided as to its value.
In a trial that took place in 1836 a bank inspector was put in the box to give an opinion as to the genuineness of a signature and the judge refused to admit this as evidence. The point was carried to the Court of Appeal, but was still left unsettled, an equal number of judges being for and against the admissibility of such evidence.
Mr. Justice Wills, in his standard work onCircumstantial Evidence, relates that Lord Denman pronounced that evidence as to handwriting might be regarded as an expunged chapter in the book of evidence. In spite of this dictum, however, the evidence of the handwriting expert was made legal in Civil Cases in 1854, and eleven years later it was also legalised in Criminal law.
Long before a witness was permitted in this country to give his opinion upon writing which he had notactually seen written, or with the author of which he was unacquainted, expert evidence of this kind was admitted in the laws of different countries in Europe and in many of the American States.
Handwriting Experts.
A good deal has been heard of late of the shortcomings of the handwriting expert, and owing to a mistaken idea as to the nature of his evidence, the view has been strongly expressed that such evidence should no longer be admissible.
The present feeling against evidence on handwriting is partly due to an exaggerated importance having frequently been attached to the conclusions of the expert, so that as soon as it could be shown that he had made a mistake, no further trust was to be placed in his opinion; and partly to the dogmatic attitude of certain experts in the past.
As Lord Brampton pointed out in hisReminiscences, the judges in mid-Victorian days were afraid to trust their own judgment in matters of handwriting, and powers almost occult were ascribed to the expert, who, after all, only uses ordinary scientific methods.
The true function of the handwriting expert is to act as a sign-post to the jury. His observation has been trained to notice minute points of resemblance and difference, and he is thus in a position to point out in what respect and to what extent two handwritings resemble one another or differ, and it is then for the jury to draw their own conclusions from the facts laid before them.
It is now no uncommon occurrence for a judge in summing up a case to the jury to emphasise the point that the evidence of the expert is only a matter of opinion, and that the real decision rests with them. In this way it is possible for the judge to correct the too decided statement of opinion which the expert is sometimes, under stress of cross-examination, forced to give.
Netherclift, who was the chief expert in the days when Lord Brampton was at the bar, had such faith in his methods that finally he came to believe that he could never make a mistake.
This belief received an amusing check in a case in which he was under cross-examination by Lord Brampton (then Mr. Hawkins).
Netherclift had claimed that his system gave infallible results, and had further stated that his son, whom he had trained, made use of the same system.
“Then,” said the wily advocate, “your son working on your system is as good as you are?”
“Yes,” replied the father with some pride in his voice, “he is.”
“That is to say, he, too, is infallible?”
“Yes,” again replied the witness.
“Well, now, Mr. Netherclift, was there ever a case in which you and your son appeared on opposite sides?”
Netherclift tried to evade the question, which, he complained, was an unfair one, but on being pressed was forced to admit that on a certain occasion he had given evidence on one side and his son upon the other.
Swift came the unanswerable retort, “How comes it then that two infallibles appeared on opposite sides?”
Netherclift’s dogmatic manner rendered him peculiarly liable to fall into traps like this, and many were the occasions on which he was found tripping.
Readers of Lord Brampton’s book will recall another amusing instance in which the expert was “put in a hole” by his opponent, who tells the story in these words: “When I rose to examine I handed to the expert six slips of paper, each of which was written in a different kind of handwriting.
“Netherclift took out his large pair of spectacles, magnifiers, which he always carried. Then he began to polish them with a great deal of care, saying as he performed that operation, ‘I see, Mr. Hawkins, what you are going to try to do—you want to put me in a hole.’ ‘I do, Mr. Netherclift, and if you are ready for the hole, tell me—were those six pieces of paper written by one hand about the same time?’
“He examined them carefully, and after a considerable time, answered: ‘No; they were written at different times, and by different hands.’
“‘By different persons, do you say?’”
“‘Yes, certainly.’”
“‘Now, Mr. Netherclift, you are in the hole! I wrote them myself this morning at this desk.’”
The feeling of distrust with which the evidence of the expert in handwriting is often regarded by the legal profession is illustrated by a capital story that was told recently by Sir Edward Carson in a letter to theTimes. An Irish counsel in a now forgottencase began his cross-examination of a handwriting expert with the curious question—“Where’s the dog?”
“What dog?” said the bewildered witness.
“The dog which the judge at the last assizes said he would not hang upon your evidence.”
How closely two distinct handwritings may resemble one another was shown in a celebrated case in which handwriting experts were proved to be utterly mistaken. This was the trial of Sir Francis Truscott, a former Lord Mayor of London, at the Old Bailey in 1879.
It was asserted that the defendant had sent a post card to a friend named John Kearns, who had at one time served with him upon the City Council, accusing him of a criminal offence and warning him that he was being watched by the police.
At the trial evidence was given in the most positive manner by a lady who was acquainted with Sir Francis Truscott to the effect that the moment she had been shown the card she had recognised the writing as his.
This opinion was supported by Charles Chabot, an expert in handwriting, who stated in the witness-box that he was certain that the writing on the post card had been done by the same individual who had written certain letters of the defendant which he had examined. The similarities between the two writings were, he asserted, too close not to have been the work of one individual.
Evidence of the same character was then given by Netherclift, who swore that from a minute comparison of the libellous post card with letters in the admittedwriting of the accused there could be no doubt but that they were written by the same person.
The defence was opened by a witness named Smith being put in the box. He stated that he knew both Mr. Kearns and Sir Francis Truscott, and was aware that the friendship between them had ceased. He was then shown the post card and asked whose was the handwriting upon it.
“I wrote the post card,” he said. “It is my own writing.”
Answering further questions, this witness stated that he had been abroad when the charge was brought against Sir Francis Truscott, and that as soon as he learned what had happened he had made an affidavit that the writing was his.
The father of this witness produced post cards written by his son and stated that the libellous post card was in the handwriting of his son and not in that of Sir Francis. Evidence was also given by another witness who knew both Sir Francis and Mr. Smith, and who had no doubt but that the post card was in the handwriting of the latter.
At this stage the jury intimated that they had heard sufficient, and brought in a verdict of “Not guilty.”
Mr. Justice Wills records a case in which a bank clerk being shown a forged signature swore positively that he had written it, while he was doubtful as to the authenticity of signatures that were undoubtedly his.
Another instance of the way in which writing may be so skilfully imitated as to deceive even the man whose writing it purports to be is afforded by the trial of a solicitor named Shaw at the Derby Assizes in 1861.
He was accused of having forged a mortgage, and at the trial a client of his named Abel went into the witness-box and in all good faith swore that his genuine signature upon a document was not his, while he recognised the forged signature as his genuine writing.
It was proved conclusively, however, at a subsequent action that was brought three years later, in connection with the forged deed, that Abel’s signature upon it had been forged, and the convicted solicitor was brought into court to give evidence that he had himself signed the document.
Another curious example, also cited by Wills, of the uncertainty of evidence as to writing was that of a trial in which a deed that was produced bore the signature of Lord Eldon. The solicitor in the case had no doubt as to this being a genuine document, and yet it was positively stated by Lord Eldon that he had never witnessed any document in his life.
The cases of wrong conclusions as to handwriting have been as numerous as those of mistaken identity of person, and have had as tragic consequences.
The notorious case of Beck will occur to everyone as an instance of a man being not only wrongly identified, but of being also the unfortunate possessor of a handwriting that had a close resemblance to the writing of someone else.
The two false identifications combined were sufficient to send an innocent man to prison, and it was long before it was established that the witnesses upon whose evidence he had been convicted had been utterly mistaken both with regard to his identity and his handwriting.
FORGED DOCUMENTS
Use of Microscope—Erasures—Photographic Methods—Typewritten Matter—Examinations of Charred Fragments—Forgery of Bank Notes.
Use of Microscope—Erasures—Photographic Methods—Typewritten Matter—Examinations of Charred Fragments—Forgery of Bank Notes.
The most valuable methods of detecting forgery have been based upon the use of the microscope, which will frequently reveal alterations that are quite invisible to the naked eye.
For instance, a letter may have been so carefully erased as to defy detection by ordinary examination, but a microscopical examination will show the slightly roughened surface of the paper, where the fibres have been disturbed in the process of erasure. A notable example of this was seen in the Whalley will case, an account of which is given on a later page, and numerous instances of the same kind have come under the direct observation of the present writer.
In one of these cases, which was settled before it reached the courts, a letter which was to be put in evidence in a dispute as to some property had originally contained the words “your house,” but the “y” had been skilfully erased, so that the words read “our house.”
When the paper was held to the light it showed an almost imperceptible thinness at that place, but under the microscope the ruffled fibres on the surface of the paper where the sizing had been scratched off, were very noticeable.
Skilful forgers guard against this obvious sign of alteration by treating the erased place with a solution of rosin in spirit, which leaves a fine shiny layer upon the paper similar to that of the original sizing.
A treatment first with hot water and then with alcohol will remove this coating of glue or rosin, and when the paper has been dried again it will be found that this part, which will now be free from its protective layer, will absorb a drop of water more rapidly than the rest of the surface.
Another simple test to reveal erasure is the use of iodine vapour, which will often cause a blue coloration (due to starch) upon the moistened surface from which sizing has been removed, but will only colour the remainder of the paper brown.
This test gave a very pronounced result in the examination of the letter to which reference has been made, in which erasure of the letter “y” had been suspected from the general appearance and microscopical examination of the surface of the paper.
The course of the tests described above should be followed under the microscope, although in some instances the fraud is so extensive as not to require any magnification. As a rule, however, it is preferable to use only one drop of a reagent, and to follow closely under a low power of the microscope, its action, both upon the material of paper and upon the ink of any writing, which it may render visible.
The detection of mechanical erasure, which as was mentioned above, is frequently indicated by the paper being thinner and more transparent at that place, is often rendered more certain by photography.
Thus if the document on which was the suspected erasure is placed between a strong light and the camera, the negative will show a darker area corresponding to the place where more light was transmitted through the paper.
A photograph taken in direct light would probably in such a case show nothing, but in a negative taken with the light falling obliquely upon the paper, the fibres that had been roughened by the erasure would be visible, unless a subsequent treatment with glue or rosin had been used to conceal the injury to the surface.
Ink applied to the surface of paper from which the sizing has been removed will show more or less tendency to spread, as upon blotting paper, and although this may be so slight as to escape the notice of the naked eye, it will be plainly visible under the microscope, and on a photographic enlargement the rough edges of the marks will be very pronounced.
Every little fault or attempt at touching up will be brought into prominence, and in cases where writing has been removed by the use of chemical reagents the slight yellow stain which is frequently formed upon the paper—a stain so trifling that it would not ordinarily attract notice—will appear as a dark blotch upon a photographic reproduction. It has frequently been claimed that it is possible to distinguish between different kinds of ink by means of photography. Since inks contain provisional colouring matters which cause the dried pigment upon the paper while apparently black to be in reality red-black, blue-black, etc., it was asserted that suchdifferences would be made manifest in photographs taken on an ordinary plate, and still more by the use of colour-sensitive plates.
The present writer, however, has been unable to confirm these statements. It is true that differences in intensity appear upon the negative, but these are not any more pronounced than the differences obvious to the eye in the writing, and the use of special plates and screens does not give any more satisfactory results.
The chief use of the photographic methods is to distinguish differences in form rather than in colour, and to record them for purposes of demonstration.
One direction in which photography is particularly useful is in deciphering the words in faded ink upon old documents, for the yellow colour of the ancient vellum is due to the formation of iron oxide.
Of recent years photography has supplied another valuable means of detecting alterations in documents, and it has been found particularly useful for demonstrating to a judge and jury the results of a microscopical examination.
Photographic reproduction and enlargement has the advantage over chemical methods of not producing any alteration in the ink or paper, and in some instances is just as effective as the latter. In the examination of wills, for instance, it is necessary to obtain the express permission of the President of the Probate Court, before any chemical tests may be applied to the document, and except under special circumstances such permission would certainly be refused.
All the details of the writing and of the texture ofthe paper may be recorded by the camera, and a photographic enlargement may then be made to any required extent, so as to obtain what practically amounts to a record of the microscopical appearance. And the process has the additional advantage over microscopical examination that a large portion of the magnified surface may be examined at the same time, whereas in studying a document under the microscope, the view is restricted to a very minute portion of the surface.
With the more general use of the typewriter it became possible to write libellous letters with much less risk of detection than in the case of letters written in ordinary pen and ink, for the machine eliminates the personal characteristics of the writer.
The differences between various makes of typing ink are also less pronounced than the differences between different kinds of writing ink, and the proof of the identical character of two inks has, therefore, usually less significance.
There are, however, certain typewriting inks, which are characteristic from the fact that they contain finely-divided carbon, and are, therefore, unlike most typing inks, exceedingly permanent, and it is also possible to distinguish between the more common violet aniline inks by the different degrees of resistance that they offer to bleaching reagents.
Although it is not possible to identify the writer of a typed document by a study of the typing it is frequently not a difficult matter with the aid of the microscope to identify the machine upon which it was written.
The principle underlying such identification is that the letters upon a new typewriter are arranged at very nearly equal spaces from each other and produce a fully horizontal line of writing. But after being in use for a very short period some of the letters are certain to get out of alignment, and to give faults in their relative position, which are usually reproduced every time those letters are struck. Thus, for instance, an “a” may be a little above the line and an “r” fall too much to the right, and these peculiarities will almost invariably recur throughout every scrap of writing done upon that machine, until the alignment has been adjusted. In no two machines are exactly the same variations in the relative positions of the different letters likely to occur. The chances of this happening is exceedingly remote, for there are some seventy letters and signs upon a typewriter.
A practical illustration of the value of the evidence thus afforded, was seen in a case that occurred about a year ago. It was suspected that a letter had been written in collusion with a clerk in a certain office, and proof of this was thought likely to have considerable influence upon the issue of the trial.
When this letter, which was in typewriting, was compared with another letter that had unquestionably been written in that office it was found that the faults of alignment in both were identical. Wherever a letter, or combination of letters, in the one fell above or below the line, the same thing occurred in the other, and wherever there was unequal spacing between two letters the distances were invariably equal in both cases.
In addition to this, the ink, which was of theviolet type, contained the same pigment, and the watermarks on the two sheets of paper were the same.
There could, therefore, be no reasonable doubt as to the two letters having been written upon the same machine. As a matter of fact, this proof of collusion did not carry the weight that had been expected, for the case was decided upon issues that were not affected by such proof.
With the aid of a measuring-scale upon the eyepiece of the microscope it is possible to measure the thickness of strokes of writing only ten thousands of an inch across, and in some cases to prove in this way that a certain part of a document was written at a different time or with a different pen than the remainder of the writing.
In attempting to reproduce a signature a forger will probably make a preliminary outline with a blacklead pencil and then go over this with ink.
The imperfect removal of the pencil marks may then betray the fraud, as in the Whalley will case described on another page. In some instances the particles of the graphite may be seen with the aid of the microscope to project beyond the upper layer of ink.
Additions and alterations made to the letters in writing are clearly visible when magnified, and may be demonstrated in court by means of a photographic enlargement. Any irregularities in the edges of the letters or any break between one part of a letter and another appear much more pronounced when examined in this way, for all faults are enormously intensified. Thus the figure “0” might be altered into “9” bythe addition of a stroke, or a “3” turned into an “8,” but it would be practically impossible to do this in such a manner as not to show when slightly magnified.
The accompanying illustrations, for which the writer is indebted to Mr. A. S. Osborn and the proprietors ofKnowledge, will make these points clearer. In Fig. A is shown the result of an attempt to change the number “11” into “17” by the addition of a stroke to the top of the second “1.” The small inset represents the appearance of the fraudulent alteration, while beneath it is seen the microscopical enlargement, in which the joining of the added portion is plainly visible.
Occasionally it happens in fraudulent alteration of writing that a stroke or part of a letter may touch some of the original writing, and betray itself by being above instead of below the older letter.
Thus in Fig. B the words “in full to date” were added to the receipt after the signature had been put, and it will be noticed in the enlargement of the cross stroke of the “t” in “date” and the top of the capital “C” in the signature (Fig. C), that the alleged older writing comes uppermost. The point at issue in this dispute was whether the receipt referred to a whole sum or only to a payment on account.
The writer in the course of his experience has seen many similar fraudulent alterations, but has never met with a case like that described by Mr. Osborn, where the perforations which are in common use as a means of preventing fraud had been carefully filled in, and new perforations made. Fig. D shows that a fraud of this kind may be detected with certaintyby the aid of the microscope, the edges of the original perforations appearing as rings of a lighter hue.
ALTERED NUMBER
ALTERED PERFORATION
Detection of Forgery by means of the Camera and the Microscope
By kind permission of “Knowledge”
The subsequent addition of writing to a document was in one instance detected by the fact that the paper had been folded before the later writing was introduced, and in the crease thus formed the sizing on the surface of the paper had become worn, leaving the fibres more porous. Here the ink had shown a tendency to become diffused, and the blurred edges of the lines thus produced were very manifest.
Even where paper has been so completely charred that no signs of writing remain visible, it is frequently possible to render the characters visible once more by continuing the incineration until only a white structure of ash remains.
When the writing was originally in ink the characters will usually appear in reddish-brown marks (due to the iron in the ink) upon the white background of ash. In the case of inks that do not contain iron, or when the writing was in carbon or aniline typing ink, this method of incineration will prove unsuccessful.
Writing that has been done with an ordinary lead pencil can usually be rendered visible by carefully regulating the heat during the incineration, so as not to burn away the graphite. Marks done with a red pencil are, as a rule, burned away with the paper, but blue pencil marks usually persist owing to the presence of an iron compound in the pigment.
In the case of printing inks it is rarely possible to render the characters visible again, except when, as in blue printing ink, some iron pigment was present.
The limits of this method of reading writing upon charred paper have recently been investigated by Habermann, who finds that a main essential for the successful working of the process is that the paper itself shall yield a coherent white ash. In the case of common varieties of paper, especially printing paper, which are loaded with china clay and other mineral matter, this condition is admirably fulfilled.
With pure rag papers, however, the ash is much less coherent and is too small in quantity to leave a background. Even in such cases it is possible to increase the amount and coherence of the ash by painting the reverse side of the charred paper with a solution of a mineral fixative agent, such as aluminium acetate. On now drying the paper and continuing the ignition the added substance leaves its own white ash which binds together the ash of the paper.
The fragments of white ash upon which writing has been made visible will obviously be extremely fragile, but they may be rendered firm enough to handle by applying a solution of collodion to the reverse side, which on evaporation leaves a layer of nitro-cellulose similar to that with which incandescent gas mantles are coated.
Any shrinkage or distortion of the letters in the writing caused by the contraction of the ash of the paper during the incineration is obviated or minimised by burning the carbonised paper very slowly.
A record of the revivified writing may also be made by means of photography.
The one pound notes issued by the Bank of England until as late as 1826, appear to have afforded peculiartemptations to forgery, judging by the number of persons convicted of the offence.
A FORGED RECEIPT
PORTION OF THE SAME
By kind permission of “Knowledge”
TESTS TO DISTINGUISH OLD FROM NEW INKS
(SEEPAGE 110)
The statistics on this point are very remarkable. Between the years 1797 and 1811, 471 people were convicted of uttering the notes or having them in their possession.
In 1814, the number of fraudulent one pound notes detected was 10,342; in 1815, 14,085; in 1816, 21,860; in 1817, 21,241; and during the first three months of 1818, 8,937.
The ease with which the notes could be imitated, and the readiness with which they could be circulated, caused hundreds of people to take up the trade of forgery, until at length whole days were occupied at the Old Bailey with the endless trials and convictions.
Much indignation was expressed in the newspapers that the Bank had not issued notes which could not be imitated, and as a result of this outcry, a committee of scientific men was appointed to examine and report upon the best means of checking the evil.
Their report stated that they had examined many specimens of engraving, but none that had been submitted to them was proof against skilful imitation. Most of the forged notes had been clumsily imitated, and from this it appeared that the public were quite ready to be deceived by them.
It was commonly believed, though without foundation, that the Bank placed a private mark upon their notes by which they could subsequently be identified.
The general dissatisfaction with the behaviour of the Bank authorities was intensified by the amountof public money that was spent in the prosecution of the forgers, and the view was freely expressed that the Bank had no right to assume the office of prosecutor.
In the year 1818, for instance, there were 242 prosecutions, the cost of which was £34,357.
So pronounced became public opinion upon the subject that the Bank was forced to allow the culprits to plead guilty to a minor charge, the penalty for which was transportation instead of death.
This became almost a necessity, since there were frequently batches of twenty or thirty convicted forgers awaiting execution, though the death penalty was only exacted in a relatively small proportion of the cases.
During the seven years ending 1825 there were 78,918 males and 14,800 females tried on the charge of forging these notes. Of these prisoners, 17,874 were acquitted, while out of the remaining 75,844 sentence of death was passed upon 7,770, though not more than 579 of these were executed. Even this small proportion gave the terrible yearly average of eighty-three executions.
As it was at that time impossible to stop these wholesale forgeries the abolition of the issue of one pound notes, which took place in 1826, was obviously the only solution of the difficulty.