When the expert has been called upon to give an opinion upon the genuineness of writings he embodies his conclusions in a report of which the following may be taken as a fair example:—
To the Chief of Police.
Sir,
REX versus JONES.
In accordance with your instructions dated —— I beg leave to inform you that I have made a careful examination of the document marked A, and attached hereto, and compared it with the documents marked B, C, D, E and F, also attached.
I have arrived at the conclusion that the document A was written by the same hand as produced B, C, D, E and F.
The main reasons which have led me to form this opinion are these:—
First, although the writing in A bears at first sight no resemblance to that of the other documents, the difference is only such as experience leads me to expect in a writing which has been purposely disguised, as I believe this has been.
The writing on the five documents B to F I take to be the normal hand of the author, and that on A to be the same writer's hand altered so as to present a different appearance. I will call the specimens B to F the genuine examples, and A the disguised.
Experience shows that the person who writes an anonymous letter generally seeks to disguise his hand by departing as much as he deems possible from his normal writing. The usual hand of the writer of the genuine document is a free rounded hand sloping upwards towards the right. The writing of A presents exactly the features I would expect to find when, as appears to be the case here, the writer has adopted the familiar trick of sloping his writing in a direction opposite to his normal hand. While the result of this change is to alter the apparent style and general appearance of the writing, the alteration does not extend to certain tricks and characteristics which are plainly obvious in the genuine letters and are repeated in the anonymous letter A.
The writing in the genuine letters contains fourteen very distinctive peculiarities, or tricks of hand, which I find repeated in the anonymous letter A.
(Here describe them, as for example.)
1. The figure 4 in the dates is always made like the print form of that figure.
2. The small e is always of the Greek form.
3. The small t is always crossed by a bar thick at the beginning, tapering to a point, with its longest part behind the shank of the t [and so on].
The various points of resemblance are set out in detail, a separate paragraph for each, and each paragraph numbered.
It is extremely important that a report should be fully descriptive and written in plain, non-technical language, easily understood by the jury, who will have to decide whether the resemblance has been made out.
Too many handwriting experts spoil the effect of their evidence by employing technical language and presuming on the part of the jury an acquaintance with the methods of comparing handwritings.
Do not be satisfied by saying that certain letters resemble each other. Show by an enlarged diagram how and where, indicating the parts to which attention is called by arrows. Place the single letters to be compared in parallel columns, headed with the alphabetical letter distinguishing the document in which the particular letter occurs. Use foolscap paper, and write on one side of the paper only.
The usual method of dealing with the handwriting expert in the witness-box is shown in the following extract from a report of an actual case.
Mr. D. B—— was called by counsel for the prosecution and duly sworn.
Q.—You have had considerable experience in examining handwriting.
A.—Over twenty years.
Q.—Look at these documents. (Hands documents to witness.) Have you seen and examined these?
A.—I have.
Q.—Have you formed any opinion upon them?
A.—I have, and have prepared a report.
In some cases the expert is allowed to read his report in full. In others he is requested to give a verbal report, but if the point be insisted upon, the judge generally permits the report to be read, either by the expert or by counsel. A copy of the report, together with the documents in dispute are then usually handed to the jury for examination. The expert may proceed to illustrate his point with the aid of a blackboard and chalk, but much depends upon the attitude taken by the judge and counsel. Some judges insist that the expert shall confine himself to expressing his opinion, leaving counsel to deal with the explanation and comparison; others give the expert every opportunity of showing how he has arrived at his opinions.
The examination in chief is usually a very simple matter. The trouble for the expert begins when counsel for the other side gets up to cross-examine.
In nearly every case the object of the cross-examining counsel is to ridicule the art and get the expert to admit the possibility of other writers possessing the same peculiarities which are said to distinguish the letters before the Court.
Counsel's favourite trick is to select some letter and ask the expert if he is prepared to swear that he has never seen something just like it in some other person's writing. The expert who knows his business will insist on keeping well to the front the bedrock basis of handwriting comparison, which is the application of the law of probability to cumulative evidence. It is not a question whether some other person may be in the habit of making a t or a k similar to those cited as evidences of common origin, but whether it is probable that two persons should make a dozen or more letters in precisely the same way under similar conditions and exhibit precisely the same peculiarities of style. He should reply with the unanswerable postulate that millions of persons possess red hair, snub noses, a scar on the face, blue eyes, bent fingers and a stammer; but it is millions to one against any two persons possessing all six of those peculiarities.
In the course of his replies the expert may justifiably help his own case by repeating, when opportunity occurs, such irrefutable axioms as, No writer can say off-hand what peculiarities he may exhibit; that there are scores of ways of dotting an i, or crossing a t, and that few persons know which form they mostly affect. Fifty such points may be gathered from this little volume alone, while acquaintance with the works of other writers on caligraphy will supply ample ammunition for meeting and repelling the customary form of attack on the handwriting expert.
Another method of discrediting a witness is to remind him that experts have differed, the Dreyfus case being usually cited. The answer is obvious. First it is essential to be assured that those experts were all competent, for there are degrees of competency in judging handwriting as in every other subject on which opinion may be called. It is a notorious fact that in the Dreyfus case the most competent experts testified that the Henry letters were forgeries, the authorities called on the other side being in most cases unknown men or amateurs of no standing. A number of these self-styled experts possessed no other qualification than presumed familiarity with the handwriting of Dreyfus. It is also worthy of note that several of the experts on both sides proved most inefficient witnesses, obscuring their explanations by the employment of technical phraseology which conveyed little meaning to the lay mind.
Exactitude and regularity in the choice of the words used in describing the parts of letters should be strictly observed by the student. The rules given in the chapter on "Terminology" should be mastered and adhered to. In most cases the terms there applied to letter-analysis will be found to be self-explanatory.
No work dealing with the study of handwriting would be complete unless it recognised that phase of it which touches on the delineation of character by an examination of the caligraphy.
That many valuable clues can be picked up by the expert who applies the principles on which the graphologist works is indisputable, nor is it necessary to accept all the theories claimed as reliable by those who practice this interesting branch of the art of writing-analysis.
There is no doubt that many persons have attained a remarkable degree of proficiency in deducing from the hand-gestures of an unknown person a very accurate estimate of his or her character, and this fact should prove that the principles of the art of graphology are based on scientific grounds, or at least that the rules on which the student works are regular and not, as some suggest, mere guess-work or coincidence.
The elder d'Israeli, in his fascinating work, the "Curiosities of Literature," devotes considerable space to the subject. Among other things, he says:—
"Assuredly nature would prompt every individual to have a distinct sort of writing, as she has given a peculiar countenance, a voice, and a manner. The flexibility of the muscles differs with every individual, and the hand will follow the direction of the thoughts, and the emotions and the habits of the writers.
"The phlegmatic will portray his words with signs of labour and deliberation, while the playful haste of the volatile will scarcely sketch them; the slovenly will blot and efface and scrawl, while the neat and orderly-minded will view themselves in the paper before their eyes. The merchant's clerk will not write like the lawyer or the poet. Even nations are distinguished by their writing; the vivacity and variableness of the Frenchman, and the delicacy and suppleness of the Italian, are perceptibly distinct from the slowness and strength of pen discoverable in the phlegmatic German, Dane, and Swede.
"When we are in grief we do not write as we should in joy. The elegant and correct mind, which has acquired the fortunate habit of a fixity of attention, will write with scarcely an erasure on the page, as Fenelon and Gibbon; while we find in Pope's manuscripts the perpetual struggle of correction, and the eager and rapid interlineations struck off in heat. Lavater's notion of handwriting is by no means chimerical; nor was General Paoli fanciful when he told Mr. Northcote he had decided on the character and disposition of a man from his letters and the handwriting.
"Long before the days of Lavater, Shenstone in one of his letters said, 'I want to see Mrs. Jago's writing that I may judge of her temper.'
"One great truth must, however, be conceded to the opponents of the physiognomy of handwriting. General rules only can be laid down. Yet the vital principle must be true that the handwriting bears an analogy to the character of the writer, as all voluntary actions are characteristic of the individual."
Professor Foli, in his very useful work, "Handwriting as an Index to Character" (London: C. A. Pearson, Ltd.), says:
"The changes which handwriting undergoes as maturity is reached prove how directly it is influenced by the nervous condition of the writer.
"The writing proper to childhood is large, round and accompanied by a laboured pen movement; whereas that which is normal as manhood or womanhood is attained is smaller, and turned off by a more rapid and fluent motion of the hand.
"Illness, again, affects the writing. As the hand is charged with more or less of the nerve fluid, so the writing is stronger or weaker, firmer or feebler, as the case may be.
"This goes to show the important influence which the nerve current exerts in fashioning the handwriting. Small wonder that our handwriting alters day by day. Yet it does not alter either. So far as its general appearance is concerned I grant it seems to do so. But look at the really significant points of the writing written at different times. Give a glance at the height at which the 'i' is dotted, the way in which the 't' is barred, the manner in which the letters are, or are not, connected and finished off. These things will crop up with unerring uniformity time after time.
"You do, of course, get a studied handwriting now and then, just as you sometimes meet with a formed facial expression. But that does not express the true character, simply because the control over the feelings or the power of disguising what is felt is a salient point in the character; and this very fact will serve to show that there is truth in graphology.
"That the pen, whether it be a fine or a broad pointed nib, plays a certain part in determining the thickness or thinness of the strokes, I am willing to allow, but here again we have no argument against graphology, for most people have their favourite nib—just as they prefer one occupation to another—and this is the one which will best serve to define their characteristics. The same with the surface of the paper upon which they write; some will select a smooth, others a rough kind, but whatever that may be which is adopted with comfort, it will be typical of the writer."
The following are some of the more marked signs of the character they indicate. For a fuller exposition of their application it would be well to study the work of Foli, before mentioned, and of Rosa Baughan (Upcott Gill, London, 2s. 6d.), with the scholarly work of J. Crépieux-Jainin, entitled, "Handwriting and Expression," translated by J. Holt Schooling.
General Characteristic.—The fineness of an organism will be revealed by a fine light penstroke. Coarse, low natures make heavy blurred entangled lines.
Activity is denoted by the length of the letters. Where it is feeble the letters will be widely spaced and rounded.
Excitability is shown by sharp strokes and stops. The more acute and irregular the pen-strokes the greater the intensity of feeling.
Aggression, which is the inclination to attack, the destructive force, is indicated by the final strokes of letters and the cross-bars of t's advancing well forward, the dots of the i's placed well forward. In such a word as "time" the dot would probably be between the m and e. The style is angular and well and evenly spaced, altogether a forward, "go-ahead" writing.
Economy, or acquisitiveness, is shown by the finishing strokes being turned backwards, and inwards; by a cramped hand, a disposition to curtail strokes, particularly the endings of letters, as if the expenditure of ink was begrudged.
Secretiveness, or extra caution, has its sign in the narrow, tightly-closed form of the body of the letters a, d, g, o, q, the a and o often being merely a narrow v. The general tendency of the writing is to compression, the final strokes being very short. When very marked, the letters dwindle into an indistinct unformed condition. The substitution of dashes for punctuation is another symptom.
Insincerity.—Beware of the man or woman whose writing is a fine, wavy line, upright, with short, stumpy and indistinct tops and tails, words running at their end to an almost straight line, the letters merely indicated. The flatter, finer and more perpendicular this writing, the greater the insincerity. Such a writer would probably be a polite, pleasing and plausible person, but double-faced as Janus.
Love of praise, glory, ambition are shown by a tendency to write upwards, the lines of writing trending towards the right-hand corner of the paper. The signature will usually have a curved line below it, with a degree of flourish.
Self-esteem, to which is allied conceit and ostentation, shows itself in proportion to the size of the writing, the taller and more flourished the upstrokes and the longer the downstrokes, the greater the self-assertiveness. The flourish beneath the signature will be very pronounced, often an elaborate spider's web of interlaced lines. The writing is more or less angular with the finals turned backwards and inwards.
Will power is shown by firm bars to the t, with a tendency to descend from left to right, bludgeon-like downstrokes to tailed letters, writing rather angular than rounded, and the final strokes finished by a heavy pressure. Straight, firm, downward strokes take the place of the tails to y, g, f, q.
Sympathy, good nature, kindness of heart are shown by a flowing open hand, the finals of the letters being extended and thrown out with an expansive movement. The tailed letters are long and looped, and often turned up the right side of the letter. The letters are well apart but not necessarily unconnected, and the style is curved. As a general rule hard matter-of-fact natures incline to an angular style; the artistic and softer nature affects rounded, gracefully curved strokes, and avoids straight perpendiculars or horizontals.
Constructiveness, which implies the ability to combine and connect words and phrases, is shown by joining the words together, several being written without lifting the pen from the paper. The more simple and ingenuous the method of attaching the words, the greater will be the ability. When this joining of words is carried to extremes, it may be taken as a sign of good deductive judgment.
Observation, by which is implied the keen, penetrating, inquiring mind (which in excess becomes curiosity), is marked by angularity of the strokes and finals; a small, generally neat, handwriting, with the letters disconnected.
Punctuation affords a very valuable clue to character-reading, for reasons set out in the chapter "How to Study a Handwriting." They are the most mechanical and unpremeditated of hand-gestures, and are, therefore, the more valuable.
When, for example, a dot is thick and heavy, we infer that the pen has been driven across the paper with a strong, decided movement of the hand, which would be consistent with extreme energy and will power; whereas, when the dot is light and faintly indicated we may be certain that only a moderate force has been expended upon its production, which would be compatible with less resistance and endurance in the character.
Again, a dot whose outlines were blurred would show a certain sensuousness of character—strong passions and a want of restraint over the lower propensities; whereas, a dot whose edges were sharply defined would tell of refinement and a loathing against all that was coarse or vulgar.
Careful attention to punctuation indicates neatness, order, method and love of arrangement; nor is it necessary that the punctuation should be strictly correct, for the art is but imperfectly mastered by most people, even the best educated.
Stops that partake of the appearance of a comma indicate a degree of impetuosity; well rounded stops imply calmness and tranquility of temperament. When the full stops are fashioned after the form of a comma and droop towards the right hand they indicate a tendency to sulkiness. When they are merely angular we may infer impatience and a "peppery" disposition.
Flourishes are always indicative of a certain amount of assertiveness. The simpler the flourish the less artificial this self-insistence; the more elaborate, the greater the desire to seem what one is not.
Most of the works in this list relate to that aspect of the study of graphology which is supposed to bear upon the manifestations of character. But there is not one which the student of handwriting can afford to ignore, since, apart from the debatable question of character reading, they all contain numerous hints and observations of extreme value to the student whose objective is the acquisition of aptitude in the more practical art of detecting forgery.
AUTOGRAPH COLLECTING: A practical manual for Amateurs and Historical Students. By Henry T. Scott, M.D. London: Upcott Gill. Price 5s.
A GUIDE TO THE COLLECTION OF HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS, LITERARY MSS. AND AUTOGRAPH LETTERS, &c. By Rev. H. T. Scott and Samuel Davey. (Out of print.) May be seen in British Museum and many public libraries.
THE AUTOGRAPHIC MIRROR: A monthly journal now defunct, but procurable at second hand.
HANDWRITING AND EXPRESSION. Translated and edited by John Holt Schooling, from the third French edition of "L'Escriture et le Caractere," par J. Crépieux-Jainin. Kegan, Paul and Trench.
CHARACTER INDICATED BY HANDWRITING. By Rosa Baughan. Upcott Gill. Price 2s. 6d.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF HANDWRITING. By Don Felix de Salamanca. Macmillan.
HOW TO READ CHARACTER IN HANDWRITING. By Henry Frith. Ward Lock. Price 1s.
HANDWRITING AS AN INDEX TO CHARACTER. By Professor Foli. C. A. Pearson. Price 1s.
A SYSTEM OF GRAPHOLOGY. By the Abbé Michon. In French; no English translation. A valuable work.
A HISTORY OF HANDWRITING. Same Author.
A METHOD OF GRAPHOLOGIC STUDY. Same Author.
A MEMOIR UPON THE FAULTY METHODS USED BY EXPERTS IN HANDWRITING. Same Author.
A DICTIONARY OF THE NOTABILITIES OF FRANCE JUDGED FROM THE HANDWRITING. Same Author.
THE HANDWRITING OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE SINCE THE MEROVINGIAN EPOCH. Same Author.
LES MYSTÉRES DE L'ÉCRITURE. Preface by Desbarrolles. Same Author.
THE HANDWRITING OF JUNIUS PROFESSIONALLY EXAMINED BY CHABOT. Edited by the Hon. E. Twistleton. John Murray. 1871.
This work is the only one hitherto published in England explaining the methods of the handwriting expert. Mons. Chabot, for many years the leading English expert, was commissioned by Mr. Twistleton to examine the handwriting of "Junius" with a view to deciding the authorship of the famous letters. The result was an exhaustive volume in which the process of handwriting analysis is illustrated by thousands of examples. The conclusion arrived at was that the writer of the "Junius" letters was Sir Philip Francis.
Literary and Historical
Autograph Letters and Manuscripts
Purchased.
OPINIONS GIVEN AS TO
GENUINENESS OF DOCUMENTS.
ALSO ON
SUSPECTED FORGERIES
AND
ANONYMOUS LETTERS.
BY
BLACKBURN & CADDELL,
19, CHARLWOOD PLACE,
LONDON, S.W.