1. As the member of the body with which a thing is held, an instrument used, force or action originated or exerted, or a deed done, is in frequent use. See ARRAIGN; BURN; DEATH; MAYHEM. Compare MAIN; MANUS. party or to be subscribed by him, is in evidence for some other purpose, the signature or paper in question may be compared with it by the jury.1 A paper, otherwise irrelevant, may not be put in evidence merely to enable the jury to make a comparison.2 When a witness is called to prove a signature from his knowledge of the signer's writing, he should be first cross-examined as to his means of knowledge. Handwriting is proved by the writer, by his admisHandbill. A written or printed public notice of something to be done; as, of a jusion, by his writing in court, or by a witness who has dicial sale of property. either seen him write or is familiar with his hand. The The number, time, and manner of posting such witness may be tested by other writings. In England, bills is regulated by local statute or rule of court. Hand-money. The price or earnest given to bind a bargain, after shaking hands, or instead thereof; the consideration of a handsale. See EARNEST. Hand-sale. Anciently, among northern nations, shaking of hands was necessary to bind a bargain; a custom retained in verbal contracts.2 Uplifted hand. Refers to an oath taken by raising the right hand toward Heaven. Whip-hand. The right hand; the side of a road toward the right hand. See ROAD, 1, Law of. 2. Force; violence. Strong hand. "With strong hand" implies a degree of criminal force, more than " with force and arms." Statutes relating to forcible entry (q. v.) use the words in describing the degree of force which makes an entry or detainer criminal, and entitles the prosecutor, under some circumstances, to restitution and damages.3 "With force and arms" are merely formal words in the action of trespass, and if issue be taken upon them, the plaintiff is not bound to prove any actual force.3 3. Chirography; penmanship; handwriting. Whatever one has written with his hand; not merely his usual style of chirography.4 Comparison of hands, or of handwriting. Proving penmanship by its likeness to other writing, admitted or proven to be genuine. The rule of the common law is to disallow a comparison of hands as proof of signature. An exception 13 Bl. Com. 49; Yates v. People, 6 Johns. *363 (1810). 2 [2 Bl. Com. 448. * King v. Wilson, 8 T. R. 362 (1799), Lawrence, J.; Harvey v. Brydges, 14 M. & W. *443 (1845), Parke, B.; Lawe v. King, 1 Saund. 81 (1668). 4 Commonwealth v. Webster, 5 Cush. 301 (1850), Shaw, C. J. comparison is permitted only as to test paper already in court. In some States, comparison with other papers is allowed. Test papers made for the purpose are inadmissible. An expert in handwriting may say whether in his opinion a hand is feigned or natural. All evidence of handwriting, except in the single instance where the witness saw the document written, is in its nature comparison of hands. It is the belief which the witness entertains upon comparing the writing in question with the exemplar in his mind derived from previous knowledge. Any witness, otherwise disinterested, who has had the opportunity of acquiring such an exemplar, is competent to speak of his belief. It is one of the few instances in which the law accepts from witnesses belief in facts, instead of facts themselves. If, from having seen the party write or from correspondence with him, the witness has become familiar with his hand, he may testify his belief as to the genuineness of the writing in question. Tech- . nically, comparison of handwriting means a "comparison by the juxtaposition of two writings, to ascertain whether both were written by the same person." (1) Evidence as to the genuineness of a paper may be corroborated by a comparison, to be made by the jury, between that paper and other well authenticated writings. (2) A mere expert may not make the comparison. (3) Witnesses having knowledge of the party's handwriting may testify as to the paper; but they are not to make the comparison. (4) Test documents should be established by the most satisfactory evidence. (5) An expert may be examined to prove forged or simulated writings, and to give conclusions of skill; but not to compare a writing, as, a note, in suit, with other test papers, and express his opinion, when he had no knowledge of the defendant's handwriting. The rule is that a witness who is introduced to prove 1 Moore v. United States, 91 U. S. 274 (1875); Strother v. Lucas, 6 Pet. *767 (1832); 1 Greenl. Ev. § 578. 2 United States v. Jones, 20 Blatch. 236 (1882). 3 Frew v. Clark, 80 Pa. 181 (1875). 41 Whart. Ev. §§ 705-40, cases; Commonwealth v. Webster, 5 Cush. 301 (1850). 5 Travis v. Brown, 43 Pa. 12, 13, 17 (1862), cases, Woodward, J. See also Ballentine v. White, 77 id. 26 (1874); Aumick v. Mitchell, 82 id. 213 (1876); Reese v. Reese, 90 id. 94 (1879); Berryhill v. Kirchner, 96 id. 492 (1880); Lessee of C