forty centuries of ink-第49章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


they　disclose　can　aid　or　elucidate　the　just　determination

of　legal　controversies　there　can　be　no　well…

founded　objection　to　resorting　to　them。〃　Frank

v。　Chemical　Nat。　Bank；　37　Superior　Court　（J。　&

S。）　34；　affirmed　in　Court　of　Appeals；　84　N。　Y。

209。



THIS　decision　by　a　final　court　of　adjudicature；　expresses

in　no　uncertain　terms　the　now　generally　estimated

value　of　evidence　which　science　may　reveal。

The　importance　which　that　branch　of　it　denominated

〃Chemico…legal　ink〃　has　attained　and　its　utilization

in　many　trials　of　causes　both　civil　as　well　as　criminal；

places　it　beyond　the　purview　of　criticism　or　objection。

With　the　introduction　of　a　new　class　of　inks　in　the

last　two　decades；　its　scope　has　been　much　broadened。



Innumerable　verdicts　by　juries　wherever　the　system

prevails；　all　over　the　world；　the　opinions　of　learned

judges；　whether　presiding　during　a　jury　trial　or　sitting

alone；　more　or　less　affected　by　this　character　of　evidence；

presents　fairly　the　trend　of　the　views　of　the

public　mind　respecting　it。



Constant　experiment　and　successful　demonstrations；

covering　a　period　of　over　fifty　years；　was　necessary　to

overcome　prevailing　prejudices　and　ignorance。



The　conditions　to…day；　which　happily　obtain；　are

that　the　objection　to　the　introduction　of　such　evidence

finds　its　source　usually　in　the　side　seeking　to　obscure

and　hide　the　truth　or　facts；　while　the　honest　litigant

or　innocent　individual　hastens　to　advocate　its　employment。



Another　feature　worthy　of　consideration　is　that

persons　who　possess　intimate　knowledge　of　ink　chem。

istry　and　who　might　otherwise　successfully　perpetrate

fraud　if　opportunity　presented　itself；　refrain　from

making　the　attempt　because　of　that　very　knowledge；

which　is　sufficient　also　to　teach　them　of　the　possible

exposure　of　their　efforts。　Again；　they　and　others　are

aware　of　the　reliance　placed　on　chemico…legal　evidence

as　an　aid　to　the　cause　of　justice　by　courts　and

juries　and　this　is　an　added　reason　why　they　hesitate

to　take　chances。　These　propositions　being　true；　they

establish　another　one；　viz：　that　most　of　the　attempted

frauds　at　the　present　time　in　this　connection；　are　by

the　ignorant　and　those　whose　conceit　does　not　permit

them　to　believe　that　any　one　knows　more　than　themselves。



Chemico…legal　ink　evidence　as　before　stated　has

been　employed　in　the　trials　of　causes　for　many　years；

but　it　was　not　until　the　year　1889　that　a　precedent

was　established　for　the　chemical　examination　of　a

suspected　document　preceding　any　trial。　The　honor

of　this　departure　from　the　ordinary　modes　of　procedure

belongs　to　the　Hon。　Rastus　S。　Ransom；　who　was

surrogate　of　the　county　of　New　York　at　the　time。



The　matter　in　controversy　was　an　alleged　will　executed

in　triplicate　by　one　Thomas　J。　Monroe。　Charges

were　made　that　the　three　wills　were　spurious；　as　they

were　facsimiles　of　each　other。　It　was　for　the　main

purpose　of　determining　the　methods　of　their　make…up

that　Judge　Ransom　rendered　the　opinion　and　made

the　order　for　its　chemical　examination　which　is　cited

in　full：



Estate　of　Thomas　J。　Monroe。〃This　is　an　application

by　the　special　guardian　and　contestant　in

this　proceeding；　which　is　now　pending　before　the

assistant；　for　leave　to　photograph　the　various

papers　which　have　been　filed　as　the　will　of　the

deceased；　and　to　compel　the　filing　of　two　parts　of

one　of　said　wills；　which　was　executed　in　triplicate；

likewise　that　the　last　paper　be　subjected　to　chemical

tests　for　the　purpose　of　disclosing　the　nature　of

the　composition　of　the　ink　and　the　process　or

processes　to　which　it　has　been　subjected。



〃Upon　the　oral　argument　the　surrogate　decided

the　applications　first　stated　in　favor　of　the　petitioner；

reserving　only　the　question　of　his　power　to

direct　or　permit　the　chemical　tests。　The　special

guardian　on　the　oral　argument　stated　that　he　was

unable；　to　find　any　authority　for　the　application。



〃Consultation　of　the　various　sources　of　authority

upon　the　subject　of　expert　testimony　and　the

various　tests　for　the　purpose　of　establishing　or　disproving

handwriting　has　not　resulted　in　the　discovery

of　any　authority　for　granting　the　application。

It　is　apparent；　however；　from　some　of　the　cases

that　such　an　examination　must　have　been　permitted；

for　instance；　in　Fulton　v。　Hood　（34th

Penn。　State　Reports；　365）；　expert　testimony　was

received　in　corroboration　of　positive　evidence　to

prove　that　the　whole　of　an　instrument　was　written

by　the　same　hand；　with　the　same　ink；　and　at　the

same　time。　It　is　inconceivable　how　testimony　of

any　value　could　be　given　as　to　the　character　of

ink　with　which　an　instrument　was　written；　unless

it　had　been　subjected　to　a　chemical　test。　The

writer　of　a　valuable　article　in　the　eighteenth　volume

of　the　American　Law　Register；　page　281　（R。　U。

Piper；　an　eminent　expert　of　Chicago；　Ill。）；　in

commenting　upon　the　rule　as　stated　in　the　case　of

Fulton　v。　Hood　（supra）；　very　properly　says：



〃　'Microscopical　and　chemical　tests　may　be　competent

to　settle　the　question；　but　these　should　not

be　received　as　evidence；　I　think；　unless　the　expert

is　able　to　show　to　the　court　and　the　jury　the　actual

results　of　his　examination；　and　also　to　explain　his

methods；　so　that　they　can　be　fully　understood。'



〃The　writer　of　this　article　is　also　authority　for

the　statement　that　in　the　French　Courts　every

manipulation　or　experiment　necessary　to　elucidate

the　truth　in　the　case；　even　to　the　destruction　of　the

document　in　question；　is　allowed；　the　Court；　as　a

matter　of　precaution；　being　first　supplied　with　a

certified　copy　of　the　same。



〃The　most　obvious　argument　to　be　urged　against

allowing　a　chemical　test　to　be　made　on　a　will；　and

one　that　was　suggested　by　the　court　on　the　argument

of　this　motion；　is　that；　inasmuch　as　the　paper

may　be　the　subject　of　future　controversy　in　this　or

some　other　tribunal；　future　litigants　should　not　be

prejudiced　by　any　alteration　or　manipulation　of　the

instrument。　I　do　not　think；　however；　that　this

objection　is　sound。　Take　an　extreme　case；　of　permitting

a　sufficient　amount　of　the　ink　（which　the

affidavit　of　the　expert　shows　to　be　but　infinitesimal）

for　the　purpose　of　chemical　examination；

the　form　of　the　letter　would　remain　upon　the　paper；

if　not；　the　form　and　appearance　of　the　entire　signature

might；　as　a　preliminary　precaution；　be　preserved

by　photography。　The　portion　of　the　signature

remaining　would　afford　ample　material　for

future　experiments　and　investigations　in　subsequent

proceedings　wherein　it　might　be　deemed　advisable

to　take　that　course。



〃Because　the　subject　matter　of　the　controversy

may　be　litigated　hereafter　should　not　deprive　parties

in　the　proceeding　of　any　rights　which　they

would　otherwise　have。　They　certainly　are　entitled

to　all　rights　in　this　proceeding　that　the　parties　to

any　future　proceedings　would　have。　Besides；　all

the　parties　whose　presence　would　be　necessary　to

an　adjudication　in；　for　example；　an　ejectment　proceeding；

are　（or　their　privies　are）　parties　here。　It

certainly　cannot　be　that　the　law；　seeking　the　truth；

will　not　avail　itself　of　this　scientific　method　of

ascertaining　the　genuineness　of　the　instrument　because

of　some　problematical　effect　upon　the　rights

or　opportunities　of　parties　to　future　litigations

respecting　the　same　instrument。　The　possibilities　of

litigation　over　a　will　are　almost　infinite；　and　if　such

a　rule　should　obtain　this　important　channel　of

investigation　would　be　closed。　Suppose　the　same

objection　were　raised　to　the　first　action　of　ejectment

which　might　be　brought；　it　might　then　with

the　same　force　be　urged　that　parties　to　some　future

ejectment　suit　would　be　prejudiced　by　a　chemical

test　of　the　ink　used　in　the　will；　and　so　on　ad　infinitum。



〃By　not　availing　itself　of　this　method　of　ascertaining

the　truth　as　to　the　character　of　the　ink；　the

Court　deprives　itself　of　a　species　of　evidence　which