Mr. Eisenberg. Anything else? We are referring now just to the front of the card.
Mr. Cole. Yes. The date of mailing also shows an indentation.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you think of any reason why the use of the typewriter on stencil may have been done?
Mr. Cole. I can mention reasons that I have observed on other documents which might apply to this one, and that would be an effort on the part of the operator of the machine to find a correct place for beginning typewriting, but I am obliged to say that on those other examples I have never seen such extensive stenciled writing. I would say that a single letter should give a person a pretty good idea of the position for beginning writing, and it should not be necessary to write out this material in full.
Now another theory for applying indentations to this type of material might be, say, previous experience with trying to write on a glossy surface, and knowing that you don't get enough ink from a ribbon on such a surface and possibly an intention to apply a rather sharp indentation and later fill that in with pigment. I am a little doubtful if it would be successful but one might attempt to try it, because various kinds of printing are made in that way, first by producing an indent, and then working a pigment down into the indentation. I would say on this particular document, I don't see there was any evidence that the preparer of the document went through with any such plan.
Representative Ford. For the record, I do have to leave to attend the House session, and Senator Cooper, will you preside as chairman?
Senator Cooper. Yes; I will be glad to do so.
(At this point Representative Ford departed the hearing room.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Referring to your photograph 798 again, the word "James" in "Alek James Hidell" seems to have been printed twice, as you stated before, and the second time it seems to have started—at least twice—and the second time it seems to start after the first "James" has stopped. Is that your observation?
Mr. Cole. Yes.