toral visit to the mountains of Faucigny, his delight was to preach the chaplet to these poor people. On the fourteenth of August, visiting the parish church of Aulph, he taught an affected and charmed multitude a method of saying the chaplet. Some days later, at Villeen Salaz, he again spoke of Mary and the chaplet. On that occasion, an extraordinary fact occurred, related by Mere de Chaugy:

"The Octave day of the glorious Assumption of Our Lady, St. Francis de Sales preached in the parish of St. Sebastian and St. Pancratius in Salaz. His sermon was in a catechetical form on the honor due to the Mother of God, in order to instruct the people more familiarly on what they should believe and do to be true children of Mary, retrenching all the superstitious opinions of these good souls, to whom he distributed so large a number of chaplets that it could not be imagined where he had procured them. M. Favre, his valet, deposed that they multiplied miraculously, as it was impossible for the Saint to procure so many; and that he exclaimed with joy that the Sacred Virgin had favored his inclination, furnishing him wherewith to distribute chaplets to the multitude; because every one, poor and rich, great and little, desired to receive from his hands. He gratified all, and still possessed many chaplets."

He propagated Confraternities of the Most Holy Rosary. The verbal process, written and signed by himself, for the erection of the Confraternity in the church of Petit Bornand can yet be seen.

What was this method which he taught to the people of Faucigny, and to which he undoubtedly made allusion when he said: "The chaplet is a very useful manner of praying, providing you know how to say it properly."

One of his historians, Pere de la Riviere, gives us this method in detail,

and in early editions of the "Introduction to a Devout Life" it was added at the end of Part Fifth. The following has been taken from one of the oldest editions:

"Kiss the cross of your chaplet after having signed yourself therewith, and place yourself in the presence of God, saying the Creed.

"On the first large bead, beg God to accept the service you wish to render Him, and to assist you by His grace to accomplish it worthily.

"On the first three small beads, implore the intercession of the Sacred Virgin, saluting her on the first as the most cherished daughter of God the Father; on the second, as Mother of God the Son, and on the third, as beloved Spouse of God the Holy Ghost.

"At each decade think of one of the mysteries of the Rosary according to your leisure, remembering it principally when pronouncing the holy names of Jesus and Mary, with great reverence of heart and body. If any other sentiment should animate you (sorrow for past sin or a purpose of amendment) meditate thereon throughout the chaplet as well as you can, recalling this sentiment or any other that God may inspire in a special manner when murmuring the sacred names of Jesus and Mary.

"On the large bead at the end of the last decade, thank God for having been permitted to recite your chaplet. Passing to the three following small beads, salute the most holy Virgin Mary, entreating her at the first to offer your understanding to the Eternal Father that you may continually consider His mercies; at the second, supplicate her to offer your memory to the Son that your thoughts may constantly turn to His Passion and Death; at the third, implore her to offer your will to the Holy Ghost that it may ever be inflamed with His holy love. On the large bead at the end, beg the divine Majesty to accept all for His glory and the good of

His Church, asking Him to keep you ever in its pale and to bring back those who have wandered; pray for your friends, and conclude as you commenced by the profession of faith, the Creed and Sign of the Cross.

"Wear your chaplet at your girdle or in some other prominent place as a protestation of your desire to be a servant of God our Saviour, and of His most Blessed Virgin Spouse and Mother, and to live as a true child of the holy, apostolic, Roman Catholic Church."

Without binding ourselves by vow,for it is said that St. Francis de Sales, who had made this vow, did not readily advise souls under his direction to do the same, let us attach ourselves unfailingly to this pious practice. It is the thermometer of our spiritual life.

When the entire day has been occupied, it is sweet at evening to recollect one's self close by the tabernacle, and at the feet of our heavenly Mother.

Nothing is more consoling than this devotion. The monotonous repetition of the Ave, like to the rocking of our mothers when we were little children, soothes our sorrows and is a balm for life's wounds; little by little, as the holy crown glides silently through our fingers, troubles are appeased, calm penetrates the soul, a sort of spiritual refreshment revives the fatigued body and ushers in a night of repose. Who has not experienced this, and how sweet it is to speak to God and to Mary after having long tarried with creatures?

"Dieu soit beni!"

II.

NE of the most difficult things for an expert on handwriting to determine is whether a check bearing a signature unlike the usual signature of the person signing is genuine or not. If the check be genuine and the teller refuse to pay it, the drawer of the check invariably feels affronted, a person naturally resents the idea of having his check refused. If, on the other hand, the teller pay the check and it turns out that the signature is forged, the teller loses prestige and the

bank loses money, both of which events are mortifying to an institution which prides itself on its business acumen and conservative management. Very frequently a man will sign his name under such unusual circumstances as to cause his signature to appear to be forged. And, oddly enough, there are many cases where staid, methodical business men who have signed their names for many years in in one particular style have, through some unconscious caprice or through some unaccountable whim, entirely changed their style of signature on, maybe, one check and resumed their

normal signature on those following. One illustration of this will suffice to show how a person's surroundings may affect his handwriting. There lived in Chicago for many years a very learned judge who was a model of strictness, a a rigid disciplinarian, a great stickler for forms and precedents, regular as clockwork in all of his movements, opposed to fads and fancies, and, withal, a most able man of broad attainments and lofty character. But his greatest characteristic was his preciseness of action. We shall call him Judge William Brown, although that was not his name. He had done his banking business for thirty years at one bank, and his checks were always signed "W. Brown," the signatures being so exact as to resemble copperplate text. It happened one day that while the paying teller was paying the clearing-house checks, he came to one signed, "William Brown." The handwriting closely resembled that of the Judge, but never before had the teller seen one of the Judge's checks signed with his given name as he always used simply the initial, "W. Brown." On close comparison with the other checks in the bank signed by the Judge, several variations were observed in the writing, not only of the signature, but also in the body of the suspected check. The teller took all of the checks, including the one under suspicion, over to the cashier of the bank, who was one of the best judges of handwriting in the city, and submitted the checks to him for his inspection. He said: "The check is a forgery. I have known Judge Brown for thirty years. He is most methodical. He never signed his given name to a check in his life."

But the teller said: "I think the check is genuine. I'd hate to throw it out; the Judge would be very much affronted, and I really believe that he wrote it."

Just at that moment the Judge's bailiff, who had been with him for over twenty

years, appeared in the bank and the check was shown to him.

"Judge Brown never signed that check," said the bailiff. "He never signs his full name to a check. He invariably signs 'W. Brown' to his checks, but always signs 'William Brown' to deeds and legal documents."

Still the teller was not satisfied, but went with the check over to the office of the Judge's son, who was a practicing attorney and very close to his father in all business matters.

"Father never wrote that check," said the son. "Father never signs 'William Brown' to his checks. Why, you know father! He never varies in anything that he does. Why, say, father never wrote that! Look at the writing-look at that capital W. You can see for yourself that he never makes a W like that. You haven't paid it, have you? Say, I'm surprised at you-I thought that you were an expert on handwriting. Why, any one would know that the 'pater' never wrote that check."

"Well," said the teller, "I haven't paid the check yet. It came through the clearing-house and I have until half-past two to return it, but I think that he signed it, and I'm going over to court and show it to him."

The son tried to dissuade him, declaring that his father would "fine you for contempt of court if you ask him any such fool question." But the teller felt that his judgment was at stake, so he persisted and went over to court, where he was told that Judge Brown had not been holding court for a couple of days as he had an attack of "la grippe" and was confined to his bed. As he lived but a short distance away, the teller boarded a cable-car and in a few minutes was at the home of the jurist. The check was sent up to his room; in a few minutes the nurse came down and said that the Judge had signed the check while in bed.

He sat up and wrote the check on a board laid over his knees. She volunteered the remark that the Judge was just ill enough to be in a very irascible temper, and that he had said, very testily, that he hoped that after he had kept his account with that bank for another thirty years maybe his signature would be. known. Probably this is an extreme case, but there are numerous instances of a like nature. It not infrequently happens that people misspell their own. names, and, stranger still, sign the names of the person to whom they are making the check payable instead of their own. One man made out a check to a firm in Lynn, Massachusetts, and instead of signing his own name to the check, he wrote, "Lynn, Mass." The teller recognized the writing and, turning the check over, he saw that it came from the city of Lynn and immediately grasped the situation. Calling the drawer of the check up on the telephone, he notified him that one of his checks was not properly signed. The depositor then came over to the bank and signed the check. But it would have been impossible to convince the man of his mistake if he had not seen "with his own eyes."

In a celebrated contested will case in Chicago several years ago, the whole question hinged on the genuineness of the signature to the will. An elderly lady died, leaving an estate valued at half a million dollars. She was rather eccentric, and when a will was filed bequeathing the bulk of her property to charitable institutions, her relatives went into court and contested the will, claiming that it was a forgery. The probate judge refused to allow the will to be probated. The heirs then had the two witnesses to the will indicted for forgery; they were tried, convicted, and sentenced, one to nine years and the other to three years in the penitentiary. But, pending a motion for a new trial, it came to the ears

of the attorneys for the convicted men that the paying teller of the bank in which the deceased lady had kept her bank account for many years had been over to the probate court, examining the signature to the will in company with the attorneys for the heirs at law. That this teller was not put on the stand to help convict the two alleged forgers was considered significant by their attorneys, so they hastened over to see the teller. He was asked if he knew the decedent's signature. He answered that he did-that he had handled her accounts, had paid her checks, knew her very well, and knew her signature probably better than any one living. He was asked if he had examined the signature to the will. He answered that he had. They then asked him if he considered the signature genuine or forged. He answered: "It is genuine without a doubt." They were thunderstruck with their good fortune, but still afraid, apparently, of some trap, as one of the heirs had kept an account with the bank in which the teller was employed and was on the best of terms with the bank's officials. They then asked the teller on what he based his conclusions in arriving at the decision that the signature was genuine. In reply he said: "I was convinced of the genuineness of the signature the instant I saw it; and the longer I examined it the more certain I was. It is true that her heirs had possession of all of her cancelled checks, and they gave me, as a basis of comparison, hundreds of her checks which were as unlike the signature to the will as they could select. But in the signature to the will the lady exhibited one or two very marked characteristics which she had not shown for over ten years. The attorneys told me that I was mistaken that they had all of her writings and documents; but they forgot the deposit slips which she had made out daily for fifteen years and which were filed in the vaults of our bank. I went back

to the bank and dug out deposit slips of ten years ago, and there found the marked characteristics which she exhibited in the signature to the will. When she signed that will, disposing of half a million dollars, it was a momentous thing for her, and she unconsciously lapsed into some of her old mannerisms. A forger would have taken one of her ordinary signatures as a model. He never would have selected a signature ten or fifteen years old. Then, again, if he had he would not have traced the signature, as they say, and selected one twice as large as that on her checks. You ask me why she wrote such a large signature? Simply because the will was written on a large, imposing sheet of legal-cap and a large space was left for her signature, while on the checks, which were of the 'pocket-check' variety, there was but scant space for the signature. Besides that, the signature to the will was doctored."

"Doctored," cried the attorneys for the convicted men, "what do you mean by that?"

"Why," said the teller, "the attorneys that took me over to examine the signature insisted upon my looking at it through a powerful magnifying glass. When to please them I did so, I noticed that there were very minute holes, like pin-pricks, at the extremities of the letters. They told me that the forger had. measured off letters from an original signature and then connected the marked points with the pen. I asked where was the original from which the measurements were taken if, as they said, she never in her life had written her signature as large as was there written. They were nonplussed for a moment, but they told me that forgers always left some weak point. But the pin-pricks were put in after the signature was written to cast a doubt on its genuineness. How do I know it? Easily enough. If you make holes in a highly sized piece of paper like

legal-cap and connect these pin-pricks with an inked pen, the ink immediately fills up the holes, making a tiny blot which is very apparent under the magnifying glass. If, however, you punch a pin or other sharply pointed instrument into a written line or word, the line is pushed down with the pin, but there will be no blot. That is exactly what happened in this case. The pin-pricks and indentations were made after the signature was written, with the very evident intention of making the judge and jury believe it spurious."

The attorneys for the prisoners were dumbfounded. "Would you go into court and testify what you have told us, or are you bound to the other side?"

"I am perfectly willing to testify," said the teller. "I frankly told the gentlemen on the other side that the signature was genuine, although they tried to prejudice my opinion as an expert by telling me what they could prove, although I had warned them that I did not care to hear the merits of the case nor which side they represented. I plainly told them. that I should hold myself free to testify on the side which I considered right. I impressed on them that I would simply tell them whether or not, in my opinion, the signature was genuine or forged, and beyond that I was a free moral agent. They agreed to my terms. I believe that they have suppressed evidence to send two men to jail, men who are perfectly innocent. I will be glad to testify, but I wish you to say not one word in regard to the pin-pricks, not even to your clients. I wish that to be brought out in the cross-examination."

When the arguments for a new trial prevailed, and when the trial came, the teller testified as has been stated. When he was asked on cross-examination about the pin-pricks and gave his testimony, there was a sensation in the court room. The attorneys on the other side asked for a continuance, saying that they were taken by surprise. The court