Keeper of the Scales- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Location
- Columbus, OH
I posted this here in September 2015, and will re-post it again.
This is a transcription of the Gullickson report:
Ira N. Gullickson
Questioned Document Analyst
1O308 Connecticut Avenue
Kensington, MD.
May 20, 1958
Mr. Virgil Carrington Jones
743 National Press Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:
At your request 1 have made an examination of four photostatic enlargements of a series of documents which are entitled "The Dahlgren Papers."
Exhibit No. 1 is a reproduction of known exemplars of the signature Ulric Dahlgren taken from documents in the official files of the United States Archives.
Exhibit No. 2 is an enlargement of the front side of the questioned document, identified as a handwritten Address of Col. Dahlgren to his troops. The stationery is imprinted "Headquarters Third Division Cavalry Corps."
Exhibit No. 3 is an enlargement of the reverse side of Exhibit No. 2. The writing on this document is at right angles to that on the face and bears the signature, U. Dahlgren, Col. Commanding.
Exhibit No. 4 is an infrared enlargement which shows both the front and back writing on the same plane.
After making an examination and comparison of the questioned writing with the standards, it is my opinion that these reproductions, which were made from reproductions of the original, show conclusively more than normally required evidence to establish the genuineness of the questioned original.
These reproductions show a document written on imprinted stationery and of the same thin-type of paper used at that time. The historical background of this event and the circumstances surrounding the death of Dahlgren, to a large extent, precludes the probability of forgery: (1) The forger would have had to obtain properly imprinted paper, (2) He would have had to have available sufficient specimens of Dahlgren's known writing in order to construct this document,, and (3) Most important, to have had someone so adept at copying as to simulate the writing of Dahlgren.
In my examination of Exhibit No. 1, the standard writing of Dahlgren shows three official signatures and writings made during the years 1362 and 1863, and these documents reflect a writer of great writing ability, a rapid writer who varied forms and shapes of many of his letters with a smooth flowing dexterity. For example, there are three forms of the lower case "r" and one of the strong points of establishing identity in the questioned document is the fact that three unrelated forms of "r" are used without apparent thought or deliberation.
The layman may point to the different type of capital "u" used in the standard writing from that used in the questioned. This is not a dissimilarity which would indicate forgery or a different writer. In the questioned signature, merely the initial is used. In the standard writing, which is taken from formally executed documents, the full name "Ulric" is used. Examining the line-quality, the variations of pen-pressure and pen-lifts found in the questioned document, they are all in consistent agreement with the known standards. There is nothing in the questioned document that can be pointed to as indicative of forgery, such as tremor or the line-quality found in copying. There is no appearance of copying, patching, or repairing, therefore, I can arrive at but one conclusion, that the questioned document was written in its entirety by Ulric Dahlgren, Col. Commanding.
Referring to Exhibit No. 4, the infrared reproduction of the document, this exhibit explains and proves itself insofar as the misspelling of the name "Dahlgren." It completely illustrates a condition which undoubtedly occurred due to the type of paper and the pen and ink used. The paper was very thin and quite absorbent and the ink very pentrating [sic]. Therefore, the tail of the "y" in the word "destroying" on the front side of the document pentrated [sic] the paper creating an allusion at the signature mis¬spelling the name "Dahlgren."
To reiterate, it is my opinion that the questioned document is genuine and not a skillfully [sic] or carefully prepared forgery.
Very truly yours,
Ira N. Gullcickson
Questioned Document Analyst
Metropolitan Police Department
This is a transcription of the Gullickson report:
Ira N. Gullickson
Questioned Document Analyst
1O308 Connecticut Avenue
Kensington, MD.
May 20, 1958
Mr. Virgil Carrington Jones
743 National Press Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:
At your request 1 have made an examination of four photostatic enlargements of a series of documents which are entitled "The Dahlgren Papers."
Exhibit No. 1 is a reproduction of known exemplars of the signature Ulric Dahlgren taken from documents in the official files of the United States Archives.
Exhibit No. 2 is an enlargement of the front side of the questioned document, identified as a handwritten Address of Col. Dahlgren to his troops. The stationery is imprinted "Headquarters Third Division Cavalry Corps."
Exhibit No. 3 is an enlargement of the reverse side of Exhibit No. 2. The writing on this document is at right angles to that on the face and bears the signature, U. Dahlgren, Col. Commanding.
Exhibit No. 4 is an infrared enlargement which shows both the front and back writing on the same plane.
After making an examination and comparison of the questioned writing with the standards, it is my opinion that these reproductions, which were made from reproductions of the original, show conclusively more than normally required evidence to establish the genuineness of the questioned original.
These reproductions show a document written on imprinted stationery and of the same thin-type of paper used at that time. The historical background of this event and the circumstances surrounding the death of Dahlgren, to a large extent, precludes the probability of forgery: (1) The forger would have had to obtain properly imprinted paper, (2) He would have had to have available sufficient specimens of Dahlgren's known writing in order to construct this document,, and (3) Most important, to have had someone so adept at copying as to simulate the writing of Dahlgren.
In my examination of Exhibit No. 1, the standard writing of Dahlgren shows three official signatures and writings made during the years 1362 and 1863, and these documents reflect a writer of great writing ability, a rapid writer who varied forms and shapes of many of his letters with a smooth flowing dexterity. For example, there are three forms of the lower case "r" and one of the strong points of establishing identity in the questioned document is the fact that three unrelated forms of "r" are used without apparent thought or deliberation.
The layman may point to the different type of capital "u" used in the standard writing from that used in the questioned. This is not a dissimilarity which would indicate forgery or a different writer. In the questioned signature, merely the initial is used. In the standard writing, which is taken from formally executed documents, the full name "Ulric" is used. Examining the line-quality, the variations of pen-pressure and pen-lifts found in the questioned document, they are all in consistent agreement with the known standards. There is nothing in the questioned document that can be pointed to as indicative of forgery, such as tremor or the line-quality found in copying. There is no appearance of copying, patching, or repairing, therefore, I can arrive at but one conclusion, that the questioned document was written in its entirety by Ulric Dahlgren, Col. Commanding.
Referring to Exhibit No. 4, the infrared reproduction of the document, this exhibit explains and proves itself insofar as the misspelling of the name "Dahlgren." It completely illustrates a condition which undoubtedly occurred due to the type of paper and the pen and ink used. The paper was very thin and quite absorbent and the ink very pentrating [sic]. Therefore, the tail of the "y" in the word "destroying" on the front side of the document pentrated [sic] the paper creating an allusion at the signature mis¬spelling the name "Dahlgren."
To reiterate, it is my opinion that the questioned document is genuine and not a skillfully [sic] or carefully prepared forgery.
Very truly yours,
Ira N. Gullcickson
Questioned Document Analyst
Metropolitan Police Department
Bringing the