Mr. Cole.

curve. That is, here again, instead of having a simple horizontal line to represent the base of that printed letter, there is a fairly deep curve which is found in the standard writing in several places, one example being chart C, item 4.
This word also illustrates the tendency to mix lowercase forms with capitals in the case of the use of the lowercase "e" in "Orleans," and that, of course, is repeated many places in the standard writing, a good place being chart C item 6, the word "Mercedes." These are the reasons for my belief that author of the standard writing is the author of the handwriting on----

Mr. Eisenberg.

813?

Mr. Cole.

813.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Now, the handwriting and handprinting on 813 is all extremely dim. Do you have any explanation for that?

Mr. Cole.

There is evidence that this document has been treated with chemicals, probably for the purpose of developing for fingerprints. Such chemicals are ordinarily included in solvents which dissolve ink, and some bleach out ink
I think that is the reason for the poor legibility of this ink writing. At one time, I think, it probably had a pretty good legibility.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Was this the condition of the item when you examined it?

Mr. Cole.

Yes; it was.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Now, you stated that the apparent rubber-stamp printing could have been produced by the Warrior rubber kit, 115. First let me ask you, is this actually rubber-stamp printing?

Mr. Cole.

Yes; I believe it is.

Mr. Eisenberg.

That is, the printing on the vaccination certificate. When you say it could have been produced by the print in Exhibit 115, could you elaborate as to your findings on that point?

Mr. Cole.

Yes; in considering that question, I made an impression from the stamp, from the type setup in a stamp which is a part of this kit at the present time. Now the typing as set up reads “L. H. Oswald, 4907 Magazine St., New Orleans, La.," and, of course, that text repeats some of the letters, a good of the letters, which are in the rubber-stamp impression "Doctor A. J. Hideel, P.O. Box 30016, New Orleans, La.," and I made a careful comparison of these letters as taken from the stamped impression with what is shown on 813, and I found that they agree perfectly as to measurements of the type faces, and they agree as to the design of letters. Therefore, I would say that the rubber-stamp type faces from this particular kit could have been used to produce that rubber-stamp impression on 813.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Could you produce the two cards which you used to record the impression of the 115 rubber-stamp kit?

Mr. Cole.

Yes, sir; the second card is an impression from the date stamp which is a part of this kit, and that too agrees along the same lines with respect to measurements of the letters and the designs of the letters.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Mr. Chairman, may these two cards be admitted as Commission Exhibit 816?

Mr. Mccloy.

They may be admitted.
(The cards referred to were marked as Commission Exhibit No. 816 and received in evidence.)

Mr. Eisenberg.

Are there microscopic characteristics on rubber-stamp printing sufficient to make positive identifications?

Mr. Cole.

I don't regard any to be present in this particular stamp. But while the type faces could not be regarded as perfect, I don't know of any way to determine whether the imperfections belong only to this kit or whether they would be true of all Warrior rubber-stamp kits.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Did you notice any imperfections?

Mr. Cole.

Well, I did not actually catalog any imperfections, but in looking at the type I had the general impression that it is not a perfect impression, certainly not as perfect as you would get from metal type in a regular printing operation.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Now, you stamped an impression other than the one contained on the card 813. Could you explain the reasons for that?

Mr. Cole.

I stamped the material which was already set up in type. Since it repeated a good deal of the material, enough for examination, I did not want