The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1846-12-13

TESTIMONY FOR tbs pEyrScE cosTIsuArIoS
Court recommended at 10 o'clock. Plaintiff pro-
sent in the Court to-day. from which will be ex
planned by the proceedings
Mr. HAAS Il Deputy Collector at Pro.
whence, L. and do all the practical business was
clerk OF the Supreme Court OF Rhode Island for five
boarding in this cy boarded some time at Fuilers as
70 the letters between him and Mrs Conner he was
anxious to have it known that there nothing impro
per IN them that there was no obscens language
Mr. Barhr-Dont say any thing about the letters.
witness exhibited another diagram Of the franklin
House, r. showing that from the position he under.
have witness and Mrs Conner sDsrnS the he
her, am certain Of that
1v Mr. Bn.OLsr.Yss. sir; when was here in the
Mr. BRApLrr-Well now, will \ GU tell us whether at
any time during visits TO her house period
you had reason TO believe from facts coming under your
conduct Of. Mrs. Conner.
Mr.. Bnsrr objected 10 the question.
Inc court sad the witness was not oblgedto answer
and the witness refused Witness did not know that
Mrs. Conner was married sin CO 1874
Mr.. ANTHONY recalled,--Reterated his testimony of
yesterday of having MIS- Conner first in the gallery
OF the House OF representatives and of having her
there again with Mr. Harris and Of having seen in
the fall OF 64t in the Franklin House at Providence
Mr. Harris ana MIR. Conner go into bed room together
was true ne could not have them according to
the diagram of Mr. Harris but he did not occupy
BnApLsr called upon the witness to state his re.
collections OF the statements of Mr. Harris nregsrd to
contract Of marriage with Mrs Conner.
Mr.. BREsr ssid that Mr.. Harris had denied having
said any uch thing to Mr.. Anthony that he was 90
ing to marry Mrs. Conner, and there end Of the
matter.
Mr.. Bradley and Nf. Brent debated the point.
Mr. BRADLEY at length, said his object was direct
impeachment OF the chastity of this petitioner follow
ing it up for twenty yea,sback.
Tbs CorAr thought they had better leave that alone
IL su uoio he witness 70 are'aihrmation OF
ms testimony OF yesterday but not to 60 over the
whole story again.
Mr. BAEsr-i suppose, then if he is to tell the old
story he Is to give new story.
Judge MohsKLL didn't say the old story but that it
was NOT required OF the witness to tell the whole story
stood you to say the old story
The CoURr-You just understood IL as Won wished
Mr.. Brent Laughter
witness went on TO reiteratc that Mr.. Harris had fire.
quenty told him he under an engagement sf mar.
risge to Mrs Conner that he Understood Mr. Harris
was going sell of real estate; but no COM
pe,ent direct knowledge OF the fact this testimony was
:, BY Mr.. BREsr-No sir Mrs. Conner never told me
tnat she was under contract Of marriage to Mr. Harris
by MT 6RApLtr-Respecting tbs acts and conduct of
Mrs Conner at Providence, in the summer of AZ
BY Mr. BRENr-fes sir sometimes gallant the la
BY Mr. BRApLEr-No, sir | do not desert nv busi.
ness and spend my whole time in attentions to the la
BY Mr. BnEsT,Yos; sir might escort a lady TO her
Mr.. DAVID PARMErrEs, sworn-Is attached to the Gus
letters at his desk in letters received of Mrs
Conner
Here a debate sprung IN between Mr.. Bradlav and
r Brent the lormor conendng that all proofs tending
to establish the unchastsness of the petitioner were pro-
the bearing of the evidence already giveo and Mr.
Brent maintaining that these collateral matters were not
mere IN season. that no matter how ewd and loose ay
have been the character OF the petitioner it was all the
worse for Gem Van Ness IL no permitted himself to be
inveigied into marriage with this petitioner the
Marriage and not the character OF this plaintiff that was
here the question The discussion turned upon the
have in multiplying subsequent marriage il such ,bsra
were Mr. Bradley represented the pious fre ADJ TO
petitioner had deluded General Van Ness a, h inns
attributable to her conversations with him was in
TACT the consequences OF her intimacy with another per-
son al the same time, ami this fact competent to
prove, IN order as legitimate point to establish the
unchssteness Of this petitioner aud as may be
tnereirom TO show the improbabity of her claim OF
marriage in the same year with Gen Van Nessl
MIR BaESr couteuded that this collateral sort of tes
mony was not at least in order this time II we are TO
20 into all collateral testimony of this character pro
and con-, the trial may be ntermnable
The Covar laid this particular to one side for
the present You viii 30 on. gentlemen, with your d.
rect testimony
Mr.. PAsNEsrGR-Knew that Mrs Connsr was !, Pro.
vidence L. IN leia. but how long she staid nor any
thing Of the particulars of her visit; ne did not Know
Mr.. EDWARD BnASoH RosrssoS, sworn-Is resident
OF this city; was struck with the Likeness of man 10
General Van Ness he had in this city in the sprng
oflsiS saw this man pass the with Mrs Goa
not been for the woman should have takeu the man
to be General Van Ness learned afterwards that his
namswas wallace; was standing at Browns Hotel
when they passed. them several tines afterward
Cress-eramination-lt was after the Inauguration of
the present President in 545 had not been for the
lady should have taken IL Tor Gen Van Ness: hs com
pexion was very much like that OF Gen Van sss when
he was 10 heaith think he little shorter than
Gen Van Ness; think ne had blue CLOAK and that
his under clothes also no appeared TO walk
h'tle sun-as If his under pInnag little weakened;
d,d not notice any particular halt his gait he look
cd like about sixty i've years OF age might have
mentioned it afterwards the presence of Mr. Lee
they were mostly strangers standing with me a. Browns
when srst saw him saw him. perhaps hall a dozen
times IN all never saw him except with Mrs Conner
she seemed egs him as IL she was verv nr,ua of HIM
don't Know, but suppose he boarded al Mrs Conner
think he was land something of the Kind IL
,.n aoou' 'nfes Of SuF weeks alter the inuugura
Nj. LEONARD o. COor, sworn Testified 70 ,hs n,r
chase OF lot OF the plaintiff, for which he paid 500 in
furniture, and the glance 500 to the pank Of Washog
ton this was the 2osh OF Decemb last
Mr. hErsr v. HI.L, sworn.-Knew both Mr. and Mrs
yeas ago TO testify he did know ,h,, .ad
Mr. aod Mrs conner had had than one child wien
he left this city permanently, rs Mr. Bradley was of tire
impression that Mrs Fowler had testified he had only
ons chiid by her daughter.
The point debated between the opposing counsel.
Mr. BRaoLxY las understood) next proposed to prove
that there was quarrel and fight in the family at the
Navy Yard on the question OF the patsrnty Of the first
Mr. BssSr objected to this as being an inma,eral
Issue. ILsughterl
The Jury were permitted to retire. while the cour,
Mr. :. y. NlrIon, sworn.-DepoSei as to Mrs Con.
Purs as'1g soses o. he store whore he
ming about ms saying the chmnes smoked this
Returning the point in controversy the Court ,s,ed
the Question to be whether to prove the
reputation OF the plaintiff and bearing upon
t.,.., ~ ePeShS CoiatciaI IecN OF such
hearing. ~ wv i"'''e' ia
Mr. Ma,, ,nonga nc said he not fully prepared,
proceeded to cite various authorities in Opposition no The
course Of proof proposed by MIR BraSlsv dwSicb na
IRON previous acts Of The past life OF the pain showing
hsf Dad cnsrac'eT tne mpobablly, with these facts IN
his knowledge Of Cen Van Ness ever having con,ra,
ei marriage with herr SIR. May con,en dsd substsp
tally that the mere collateral question OF the past cha
racer Of the plaintiff TO dispro :. ths MAJ
rage with Gen Van Ness ~
MIR. Coxr rejoined with much earnestness of ,.n,sr
IN support oil the testimony proposed show the g.ne
raj dsreputable character Of the petitioner 10
her alleged marriage with Gen Van Nessquotiox among
coincident with this in the pecve position Of the par