30 PIlOCEEDIl!fGS OF THE 



from 1849, but I am by no means convinced that it really does so, for tbere 

 is much in it tbat is decidedly suspicious. The discoloration (which in 

 forgeries is so often a vfeak point) does not look quite natural, and I see no 

 signs tbat it is caused by the use of pounce instead of blotting-paper*. But, 

 apart from this, there seems to be an occasional tendency to lapse into what 

 may be the writei-'s own customary hand as distinct from an artificial one. 

 Take, for instance, the"Q'" at the end of "aforsaid.'' This was originally 

 written as " Q," but has been painfully altered to " d " so as to conform to the 

 usage elsewhere ; and the same is apparently the case with the " d " at the end 

 of " counted." In my experience tliere is no letter, especially when at the 

 end of a word, in which a forger is more often taken off his guard; and 

 througlioiit the document the f7-forra seems to be made with more or less of 

 an effort, as if the writer was not accustomed to it. I am also inclined to 

 think that the attestation was written by the same hand as the body of the 

 document. The mode of connecting tlie letter s with e or another letter 

 following is somewhat peculiar and characteristic, and it is exactly the same in 

 " presence " and " Joseph " as it is in " presents " (1. 1) and elsewhere t. 



A few weeks after the receipt of the ahove letter, Mr. J. P. 

 Sleeper kindly sent several sheets of his father's nianiiscript, 

 written within a few years of 1849. These were submitted, 

 together Avith a collotype of the contract, to Sir George Warner, 

 who wrote, Aug. 28, 1913, as follows : — 



The more I see of the contract the less I am disposed to believe in its 

 authenticity, for the hand varies too much in so short a document written all 

 at one time to be the writer's own natural hand, and has all the signs of an 

 attempt to disguise it. The paper, so far as I remember it, seems to be the 

 sa;ue as tbat used for most of the documents now sent, but of course it may 

 have been a blank page torn off for t.he purpose of the forgery, if it is one, as I 

 more and more strongly suspect is the case. I certainly would not commit 

 myself to a belief in the pamphlet until more copies with authenticated dates 

 of acquisition are forthcoming. 



It was obvious, after learning Sir George "Warner's opinion, 

 that every attempt should be made to obtain signatures for com- 

 parison with the contract, as Avell as other possible confirmation. 

 On Aug. 9 I wrote to the Librarian of the Boston Public Library, 

 asking if he could kindly give me the names and addresses of 



* Mr. J. F. Sleeper sent me samples of his father's white and also of his 

 dark blotting-sand, but they bore no resemblance to the fine white powder 

 which was thickly encrusted on some of the ink. 



t Sir George also wrote on the same subject, Aug. 7, 1913: — 



In the contract it is not the similarity of the signature of Bense to the 

 body of the document which struck me as a little suspicious, for I thiuk there 

 can be no doubt that, as would be natural, they were both written by the same 

 hand. The question is, whether the signature of the witness was not also 

 written by the same hand, though the intention was to disguise it. 



These of course are only grounds for suspicion, and not proofs, but they 

 make me very anxious to see specimens of both Sleeper's and Bense's hand- 

 writing, if it is possible to obtain them. The problem presented by the 

 pamphlet is an extremely interesting one, and it is well to sift the matter 



thoroughly The use of the term "Agnostic" staggers 



me, and I confess I am sceptical and disposed to ask for more proof than this 

 doubtful contract that the pamphlet is anything more than a fraud prompted 

 by an old man's vanity and desire to score off liis detractors. 



