Matching Signatures?

[BCS1973]

I have two signatures in the image below. One is a known soldier of the 95th PA from his re-enlistmant paper. The other is from a Federal Immigration form, that could be any number Patrick Sheeran's in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area at the time. The only other supporting evidence from the Immigration form is that the age of the person could be correct. The form indicates a 1828 birth year. His military career spanned several units, and his birth-date ranges from 1828-1832 depending on which record.

 

[lupaglupa]

Those do not look that similar to me. The 'S' is clearly different. The 'k' is also formed differently.

 

[BCS1973]

Those do not look that similar to me. The 'S' is clearly different. The 'k' is also formed differently.

After re-looking at the K, I didn't pick that up initially. The S is clearly different. One thing I did notice, both signatures share an "uphill slant" and I'm not sure what may cause that. I do remember back in the day when I was taught to write cursive as a lefty, I was told to turn the paper clockwise where righties were told to turn counterclockwise. I could never keep my words on the line that way, and as soon the teacher walked away, I would flip my paper to the rightly position. Also there's 10 years between the two signatures if that matters.

 

[lupaglupa]

The second one looks shakier, but that could be age.

 

[BCS1973]

The second one looks shakier, but that could be age.

Interesting. the top one is 1864, the bottom 1854.

 

[lupaglupa]

Maybe he became more adept at writing with practice?

 

[JOHN42768]

I concur that they appear to be different.

 

[Nathan Stuart]

At first quick glance, both signatures look similar.

Upon a deeper look.

Just focusing on the significant first letter of the surname.

The written 'S' is blatantly diverse. Doubt this particular letter would have been inscribed so differently, even allowing for aging changes.

 

[Mint Julep]

In my opinion, it is likely that the same person wrote both signatures. The ten year difference between the signatures explains the noticeable changes, particularly in the first letter of each name.

 

[Biscoitos]

In my opinion, it is likely that the same person wrote both signatures. The ten year difference between the signatures explains the noticeable changes, particularly in the first letter of each name.

But that S says two different people to me.

 

[R. Porter]

Some letters have noticeably different styles, while others are very similar. I would guess that cursive writing was similarly taught to most students making it likely that most would learn to form their letters in the same way. That might account for the similarities between the two signatures. The differences would occur either because they were not made by the same person or because the same person made a conscious style change. In the case above, the later signature has the traditional "S" form that I was taught and the earlier signature has what my teachers would have considered a non-standard "S". It would seem more likely that someone would start with the standard form and change to a non-standard form than the other way around. I would consider this as evidence for two different people rather than one that changed.

 

[CWdiaryPA]

I think it's likely they're the same person. It's that first "r" they seem to have trouble with, & if you squint to examine the two sigs in a global way, their lilt is pretty much identical, which, to me, is more a giveaway than individual letters. My own sig. is radically different from a decade back. His 1854 looks more amateur, the 1864 more polished. That would track through time. A hand injury could play in. But who knows.

 

[BCS1973]

In the case above, the later signature has the traditional "S" form that I was taught and the earlier signature has what my teachers would have considered a non-standard "S".

Since the man or men in question, would have been taught cursive in Ireland, I wonder if that has anything to do with a form change. Personally, I changed my signature later in life to include a script letter in my surname because it was simpler to write. I'm wondering if someone decided that the standard form of the "S" was easier.

 

[Mint Julep]

I once had my signature forged, which resulted in eighteen thousand dollars of my money being held in escrow. I could clearly see that the signature was not mine; however, the attorney representing the company holding my funds insisted that it was legitimate. Hiring a handwriting analyst would have cost several hundred dollars, which the attorney hoped I would cover.

After researching the process, I discovered that only original documents could be used for analysis. Since the attorney only had copies, he could not prove his case in court. Eventually, after several years of waiting, the attorney dropped the case and notified me by mail. I promptly forwarded that letter to the escrow company, and they issued a check.

This experience made me realize how difficult it can be to determine authenticity without examining original documents.