I'm surprised there is no errors. The paper at the time was looks thicker than modern paper. there hands look a bit weak or the type head needs cleaning. I own a mechanical typewriter and some keys are worn out just like the letter. Sometimes your finger strength is not the best for each key.

Fun comments, those! The paper is good quality bond paper -- ol' Colonel McCormick didn't stint on that, it would appear. "CEM" was obviously a good typist. (When I was first in legal practice, that formulation was still used -- the first set of initials is the signatory, the second, who typed it.) Granted, it's fairly short and routine. I'll bet the type head needed cleaning, though it did take a lot of force to get those old manual typewriters to print. As a touch-typist, I can tell you that it's very hard to get decent speed on a manual. My late mother could do it; I can't. And, of course, you allude to one of those now-virtually extinct bits of detective work -- tracing typewriters by unique issues with the keys.

Then there's that other bit of more intrusive detective work: tracing newspapers and magazines from cut-and-paste letters if they're really trying to hide it. Where it gets really intrusive is the subscription records.

When I was typing letters, I'd use the formula "xxx:TIM" - for "typed it myself".

Back when I had a manual typewriter, I believe I was timed at about 50 wpm with around 3 errors. When I graduated to an electric (pre-selectric), I think I got up to 60 wpm with around 3 errors. I was a pretty good typist but I wasn't good enough to do it for a living.

A few days before my father was born.

When does the Rabbi get his Pulitzer Prize?

Would that he would, sir. Would that he would.