Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1846-12-01

examine the witness without seeing TIE eou'e"'@
| Of he letter.
MIR. Bradley stated that his object in asking the
lady 10 write was 10 show the capacity 10 peTpe'
lrate forgery.
1.-THE advertisement, !, appears, was written ny
| Col. Lee. the former counsel for The Plainih
and signed by Mary A. Van Ness
Alter a long debate, involving the question
whether the contents of a letter should De e1poseu
| the super.cription of which WAS proved 70 DC
| thai oi the ulainiti-Mrs. Van Ness-lhe Court
decided against it, but the letter was subsequent
" shown 10 Mr Brent by Mr.. Bradley. II was
| letter signed "Mrs. Gfavesuren," addressed 10 "
| P. Van Ness, asking TO see him about business
Miss Fowler was further examined, and alleI
she left the stand,
Major J. p. Andrews examined letters, saying
that they were in General Van Ness hand-w
ing, but disguised some less disguised man ON,
er,. de had half dazen signatures oi Geheta
Van Ness, and lhev were all different
Miss Serena Conner was recalled, ana uhoei-
went an examination and cross-exam'naton.
Mr.. McIntire was shown letters, and said ne
though, Gen. Van Ness wrote them although,
il was evident some Of them we're IN disguised
hand. He was the FIRST book-keeper The Bank OF
the Nero, oils ever had, and was there icr zen
years There was uniformity 10 'he "li''ns
that could not be mistaken.
III.
es for The plaintiff you probably be conc udeo IN
an hour Tomorrow morning
The court al 4 o'clock adjourned.
Correspondence OF he Baltimore sun.]
WASHINGTON, Nov. IS, 1886.
Circuit Court-Van Ness VS.. Pan Nsss-TM
D.y Alfred Tippel.-[an agreement about
halid;ag house in Alexandra shown II saw
Ger. Van Ness write his; while writing Tins ne
referred 10 dictionaries ior Some oi the word> ];
"cciiips" 10 one Of the words. This paper is da'
led Gin Nov. AS.
Charles Manu- was married In Philade-
phia, on Pine street. Wines: was asked now
he was married and how many witnesses were
present. Objected 10 and argued by Mr.. Brent,
who read from ID Waus g. 10 show that the pro-
visions OF The statute Of Penn, requiring Twelve
witnesses 10 a marriage, are merely directory,
and do not affect the marriage; and from OH
Bnney, aus, 10 show that any person, even
LAWYER, might perform the ceremony OF marriage.
MIR Coke, Mr.. Gilpin and Mr.. Bradley repli"o.
The objection sustained. Mr. Bradley read The
Pennsylvania statute, which states that clergy
men Of all religious denominations may marry
persons according 10 the rites OF the church, ana
are exempted from Inc provisions which are ap-
picabeto magistrates.
Mir. Bradley served The counsel for plainun
with notice 10 produce certain ieitel, which ii
in these words:
Van Ness r,. Van Ness, Adm, &c.
The petitioner in this case, IS hereby nolineo ie
produce on The trial OF this cause certain pa
per. pnrpoT!ing TO have been written by John 2
Van Ne.s,o said plaintiff, daied m The 26lb day
of july, l545, or purJorting 10 be poAmarked on
that day. COKE q CARLISLE,
Nov % ,S46 For defendant.
Service Of which was Acknowledged, and an
swered, 1--WE have no such letter." long dis
cussion was had upon the suficiency Of the motto,
AMI the Requirements of the act oil Congress IL
such case made ami provided 10 which Messrs
Brent, Coke and Bradley participated Inc
Cour, ordered that the defendant should make an
affidavit stating the grounds OF their application
for this paper
In the meantime, Mr.. Core served another no
lice, which Was acknowledged, ana answered
ave have no such paper as that"
John c. Rives-l have not looked at his hand
writing for eight years. (Green Valley letter.,
If this letter was shown ME without any snspi
cious or exlraneous circumstances, | should say
i, was his. This, (Wallace leter) The direction,
do no, think to be his; The body is very much like
his hand-wriing. thought was good judge oil
writing rill the "Dowdeu case" when was salts
fed did not know as much as thought. II this
had been shewn me without the initials, should
say il was in familiar hand, and The name being
mentioned should say thatit was his. have
clerk who so closely initiates my hand that
can',tell the difference. | have examined the Or.
phans' Court letters, and think they are in Gene
raj Van Ness's writing, though slightly disguised
il they be forgeries, they are very well executed
HORNED my style Of hand writing from Initiating
that Of others.
Characterization My clerk has been with
me for twelve years. think he fell into writing
| hand like mine from copying my letters; he
was man grown when he Game 10 my office
| md had hand much like mine ] think Gen.
| Van Ness's hand lii heng ule stiff might be
| more clo.elv initiated than that Of man who
wrote finished hand. Three papers shown.
think this is ia genuine one more like his writ.
ing; don't know how Gen. Van Ness usually
made his "5's." A large number Of papers, ge-
nuine and doubted, shown witness] Miss Fow.
ler's letter and the paper she wro!e for Mr. Brad
| lev in court were shown 10 witness, and he said
though there was Sigh, difference, yet he be-
| lieyed them Ia have been written by the same
person; the "H's," "F's" and "C's" are alike; the
| Green Valley letters are in Gen. Van Ness's
wiring; the ass" in the genuine and the doubted
letters are different.
Disect examinaion.-ln these three documents
! (genune) The "S's" are different number OF pa
| pers shown TO witness and he said in the dates
the "S's" ard AS" were coupled; / once atlempt
| ed 10 disguise Inv ha i, but was found orl ahou
a year afterwards I'll tell you all about it,
There lbe witness was stopped; The court per
maps, having had enough OF peculiar illustra
iions."l My testimony Is, that these Orphsns
! Court leue,s, | should say, were Gen. Y. N
writing badly disguised. or well-execu,ed Jorge
lies; would take The letters to be in Gen. v. NJ
wiring; know nothing of female writing; Inc
Yer had any correspondence with females
Rev. Mr.. Sproe-I am clergyman OF tn'
PRESBYTERIAN Church; resided years in Pnila
delphia and Z in Carlisle, Pa, as clergyman,
married more during he time was ID fhiia
deIphia than did when in Carlisle. have mar
rid more Than t.so bundled persons while II
Pennsylvania. (Wiiness was asked what wa
The usual practice abou, marrying, license, &C
in Pennsylvania
Osiec,ed 10. A-gued by Mr.. Bradley.
MI. Brent followed 10 reply for more than y 7
honfs. in which he reviewed all the laws OF r. IN
sy,yania 10 regard 10 marriage, and made mum
Der Of points in support of proving the marr'ag
by crcums,an,al evidence, and that The Prov
sions Of The statute have become obsolete, and
custom and usage has grown up winch nave oe
come The unwritien law OF The State ne urseo
then. that il was competent Tor MIN 10 prove 0.
parcl evidence, the practice IN relation 20 mar
riage license. record and witnesses. he con
cluded al 5 minutes before o'clock. Mr. COX
followed for about % minutes. M. Gllpin als'
made few remarks. N decision was MADE.
MIR. Kell-I did not make The sales OF stoves
10 Gen. v. N. for Mrs. Connor: my brother oic
have no remembrance Of speaking 10 Gen.
~, though think aow have, about grount