tively that a receipt
produced was in his handwriting. It was thus worded, "Received the
Hole of the above." On being asked to write a sentence in which the
word "whole" was introduced, he took evident pains to disguise his
handwriting, but he adopted the phonetic style of spelling, and also
persisted in using the capital _H_.

The practice of thus testing a witness is vindicated by one of the
most sagacious of German jurists, Mittermaier, on grounds not only of
expediency, but of authority.

Comparison of handwriting, either by jury or witness, is uniformly
allowed to prove writings which are not old enough to prove
themselves, but are too old to admit of direct proof of their
genuineness.

Handwriting, considered under the law of evidence, includes not only
the ordinary writing of one able to write, but also writing done in a
disguised hand, or in cipher, and a mark made by one able or unable to
write.

The principles regulating the proof of handwriting apply equally to
civil and criminal cases.

The paper the handwriting of which is sought to be proved by experts
must ordinarily be produced in court, but such production will be
excused when the paper has been lost or destroyed and when it is a
public record, which cannot be brought into court.

Genuineness may be proved in all cases, except where paper is required
to be identified by an official seal, and except as controlled by law
applicable to attested instruments.

It may be proved by his own admissions; by witnesses who saw the party
write; by witnesses who corresponded with the party; by witnesses who
had seen papers acknowledged by the party; by witnesses having
personal relations with the party.

Comparison of handwriting, technically called _presumptio ex scripto
nunv viso_, is where a paper or papers are proved or admitted to be in
a party's handwriting, and a witness entirely unacquainted with the
party's handwriting, or the jury, is allowed to make a comparison by
juxtaposition of the writing so proved or admitted, and the writing
disputed.

All evidence of handwriting, except where the witness sees the
documents written, is in its nature comparison. It is the belief which
a witness entertains upon comparing the writing in question with an
exemplar in his mind derived from some previous writing.

In all the states of the Union the laws are uniform on the proposition
that experts may testify as to comparisons made and the results based
on su