Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[Rob Clack]

Here's two different signatures from the same person, one from 1879 and one from 1911. Probably wont help, but never mind.

George Henry Hutt 1879



George Henry Hutt 1911



Rob

[Crystal]

No! Rob! Quick-take them away! Before it's too...late...
Oh no....
Listen...
It's THEM!
...
...

[DVV]

Hi Rob,

A great help, indeed.
Obviously they (mis)match.

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

Wow! Specifically, the G is worth noting.

Mike

[halomanuk]

Both G's even,what a difference time may make....

[Ben]

Yes, thanks for that, Rob. A great help!

The G is certainly worth noting insofar as Toppy's consistency over a 13-year time period has been demonstrated, during which time he closed his G-loops - in 1898 and 1911 to be precise. I don't know if Hutt demonstrated a similar degree of consistency. Your useful comparison would suggest otherwise.

All the best,
Ben

[DVV]

Wow! Specifically, the G is worth noting.

Mike

Indeed.

The Provence Punisher

[Sam Flynn]

The G is certainly worth noting insofar as Toppy's consistency over a 13-year time period has been demonstrated, during which time he closed his G-loops - in 1898 and 1911 to be precise. I don't know if Hutt demonstrated a similar degree of consistency. Your useful comparison would suggest otherwise.

Rob's (verily) useful comparison, Ben, shows that Hutt's signature seems to have changed quite a bit within the space of 12 years, and that it appears to have changed more than Hutchinson's (for it is he) had changed over a span of 23 years.

[Ben]

Rob's (verily) useful comparison, Ben, shows that Hutt's signature seems to have changed quite a bit within the space of 12 years

Indeed it does, Gareth, and Hutt contrasts markedly with Toppy in that regard, who demonstrated a remarkable consistency of signature over a longer period of time. As far as I'm concerned, we have no indications as to the real Hutchinson's propensity towards signature variation.

Best regards,
Ben

[Scott Nelson]

But it should be obvious. Hutt is really Hutchinson. Now Hinton should really be apologising to Nunweek.

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed it does, Gareth, and Hutt contrasts markedly with Toppy in that regard, who demonstrated a remarkable consistency of signature over a longer period of time. As far as I'm concerned, we have no indications as to the real Hutchinson's propensity towards signature variation.

We do, Ben - because 1888p1-3 (or let's take 1888p2-3, just in case Badham "back-filled" page 1) demonstrates that Hutchinson's signature changed very little over the 10 years before his marriage, and very little over the 23 years before the 1911 Census.

So, the "G" fluctuated between "open-loop" and "closed-loop"... but then, so did Hutt's. Note, also, that Hutt's lower-case "t" changes between the two samples, whereas Hutchinson remains faithful to his "top-launched t" throughout - and we can confirm this across multiple samples, thanks to his not using "ditto" marks when he wrote the surnames of his wife and children in 1911.

[DVV]

one more boring post about the G

Hi Sam,
clearly, the 1879's "G" is closer to a G shaped as taught in school.
Which is logical.

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

So, the "G" fluctuated between "open-loop" and "closed-loop"... but then, so did Hutt's.

Gareth,

and this was what I was alluding too, as you obviously know, before my remark was taken and used erroneously.

Cheers,

Mike

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed, Mike.

[The Good Michael]

Gareth,

Doesn't that G help to tie up any objections in the Toppy/Hutch debate.

Aside from the G, which I didn't find to be a great difference as the mode of construction was the same, there weren't any big differences between Hutch and Toppy signatures. Now that we see that at least one other person varied between open and closed Gs, and bearing in mind that the pen stroke and effort to create either would have been identical, there should be no further objections.

I'm waiting for: Au contraire, mon cher.


Mike