it was made by the prisoner? Well,
there is the evidence of the ridge-pattern. That pattern is identical
with the pattern of the prisoner's thumb-print, and even has the
impression of a scar which crosses the pattern in a particular manner
in the prisoner's thumb-print. There is no need to enter into the
elaborate calculations as to the chances of agreement; the practical
fact, which is not disputed, is that if this red thumb-print is a
genuine thumb-print at all, it was made by the prisoner's thumb. But it
is contended that it is not a genuine thumb-print; that it is a
mechanical imitation--in fact a forgery.

"The more general question thus becomes narrowed down to the more
particular question: 'Is this a genuine thumb-print or is it a forgery?'
Let us consider the evidence. First, what evidence is there that it is a
genuine thumb-print? There is none. The identity of the pattern is no
evidence on this point, because a forgery would also exhibit identity of
pattern. The genuineness of the thumb-print was assumed by the
prosecution, and no evidence has been offered.

"But now what evidence is there that the red thumb-print is a forgery?

"First, there is the question of size. Two different-sized prints could
hardly be made by the same thumb. Then there is the evidence of the use
of appliances. Safe-robbers do not ordinarily provide themselves with
inking-slabs and rollers with which to make distinct impressions of
their own fingers. Then there is the accidental mark on the print which
also exists on the only genuine print that could have been used for the
purpose of forgery, which is easily explained on the theory of a
forgery, but which is otherwise totally incomprehensible. Finally, there
is the strange disappearance of the 'Thumbograph' and its strange
reappearance. All this is striking and weighty evidence, to which must
be added that adduced by Dr. Thorndyke as showing how perfectly it is
possible to imitate a finger-print.

"These are the main facts of the case, and it is for you to consider
them. If, on careful consideration, you decide that the red thumb-print
was actually made by the prisoner's thumb, then it will be your duty to
pronounce the prisoner guilty; but if, on weighing the evidence, you
decide that the thumb-print is a forgery, then it will be your duty to
pronounce the prisoner not guilty. It is now past the usual luncheon
hour, and, if you desire it, you can retire to consider your verdict
wh