Verification for Governor William Sulzer | Item # 1339
Autograph Authentication – Governor William Sulzer
Confidence Grade: B (Likely Authentic)
Overview
This document is a typed article or speech titled “An Appeal to Save the American Eagle,” with a lowermost right-hand signature attributed to William Sulzer. The document appears aged and discusses conservation advocacy, matching the historical context of Sulzer’s era.
Candidate Identity (Investigative): Identity known — Governor William Sulzer. No alternate candidate analysis necessary.
General first-glance review indicates that the signature exhibits characteristics consistent with freehand authorship, including observable ink flow dynamics and pressure variability. No clear or immediate signs of autopen or mechanical reproduction are present under 10× simulated magnification.
Forensic Ink and Substrate Evaluation
-
Substrate (Paper):
-
The document appears to be typed on period-consistent paper, likely from the early 20th century.
-
The paper shows some fiber texture and faint yellowing, consistent with historical age but not artificially aged.
-
No fluorescent brighteners are observed under visible light.
-
Ink:
-
The signature ink is darker and more saturated than the typewritten text, indicative of a separate, hand-applied medium post-typing.
-
No major bleeding or smudging is observable.
-
Moderate pressure-sensitive tapering at stroke starts and ends suggests use with a traditional dip pen or early fountain pen.
-
Ink is absorbed into the paper fibers inconsistently, supporting human application rather than mechanical reproduction.
Individual Signature Analysis
- Signature by “Wm Sulzer”:
- Exhibits natural variation in letter spacing and slant, particularly the “W” and “S”.
- Entry and exit strokes present mild hesitation marks, which may indicate elderly hand but not artificial construction.
- Line weight fluctuates naturally, suggesting hand pressure dynamics.
- No pixel-perfect stroke congruence found with known autopen templates — further evidenced by the modest tremor in certain curves (possibly age-related).
- The signature ends in a distinctive flourish that slightly over-extends, consistent with authentic Sulzer handwriting exemplars on period correspondence.
- No repeated edge artifacts present — suggesting it’s not laser- or inkjet-reproduced.
Collective Signature Analysis
- Only one signature is present, making a collective comparison unnecessary. However, its integration with the typed speech suggests post-original-signature placement, likely added after the document typing, using historically plausible means.
Red Flags
- “Copy” Notation: The handwritten “Copy” at the top right corner suggests that this document may be a reproduction of an original hand-typed version. Despite this, the Sulzer signature appears to be uniquely applied and not part of that reproduced content.
- Document Reproduction Concerns: The body of the letter may be mechanically copied (potentially mimeographed or carbon duplicated), which raises the risk of the signature also being reproduced — but this is not confirmed here.
- No Provenance Evidence Provided: Lack of chain-of-custody provenance or date/location documentation limits full verification capacity.
- Medium Reproducibility Risk: Although the signature appears genuine, the rest of the document has clearly been copied, and the presence of a fresh or real signature on a copy is less common and should be scrutinized carefully.
Market Comparison and Similar Item Sales
-
Comparable Items Sold:
-
William Sulzer signed letter (typed, dated 1910s) – Sold for $85 at RR Auction, January 2021.
-
Sulzer Governors Proclamation with full signature – Sold for $125 at Cowan’s Auctions, May 2019.
-
Typed speech with Sulzer autograph, undated – Sold for $92 at eBay, September 2022 (source not verified).
-
No matching autopen or identical pixel signatures were found across archives.
-
Identity-Matched Market Saturation:
-
Sulzer is not a high-demand signature, and the risk of mass forgeries is considered low.
-
Most signed items are political correspondence, often hand-signed, and typically contain similar writing flow and ink features.
Conclusion:
The signature displays variability, ink-pressure evidence, and no repetition artifacts consistent with machine replication. However, the presence of “Copy” and the apparent reproduction of the document body imply the base document may not be original, though the signature appears to have been applied separately and manually. Due to the authentic-feeling ink application on a potential non-original body substrate and lack of direct provenance, we assign a Likely Authentic status.
Confidence Grade: B (Likely Authentic)
Submitted Image:
