The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-11-29

have been actuated by no motive save that which
arose nom consciousness Of right and sense
poncnt had always been in his relations with the
plaintiff afeciionate aud happy, and that nothing
but conviction OF her infdelity could have in
duced desire on his part for divorce. That he
bore patiently, and for long time, with her extra
vsgance, her habits of intoxication and her Illicit
association with persons believed by this depouent
to be utterly unworthy, and would have continued
so 10 bear with it, and that her offer of divorce
under sn arrangement between the parties would
have been accepted if this depOnent had MOI re-
garded il as unjust and dishonorable.
And he says that the said Catherine Forrest de-
clare under oath, that she had determined not to
ac2ear'o The libel Of divorce ip the Court Of Com
mon Pleas Of philadelphia, and will wholly and
absolutely decline, refuse, and omit, TO appear 10
the same; and, yet he AYERS that, in her affidavit
before the Legislature Of Pennsy lvania che said,
"whtnever summoned am ready to appear in
Court of Justice, and there TO viadicate my perfect
innocence" She now declines 10 assert her in
nocence before the very tribunal TO which she
then appealed, and to which, at her own instance,
she has thus been summoned by this deponent
And he says that, as resident and a citizen of
the State of he is entitled to the re-
medies afforded by her laws and Courts; and the
prayer of the said Mrs Forrest, that he shall be
restrained from prosecuting his action for divorce
before the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia,
cannot be granted without signal violation of his
rights as citizen of the United States, and an un-
unstable interference with the tribunals of his ma
tive State, OF which he is a resident and citizen
And this deponent AYERS that Mrs. Forrest says,
IN her letter TO the dep0nent of the date of Decem
Der 2ih, lS49, that the cause of separation was
Lawson che said, as appears by his affidavit here
to annexed, that the cause was known to third
party.
And he says that he has never used any indirect
or improper means TO urge or strengthen his said
application for divorce, nor to sustan himself in
any of the proceedings arising from it, that he cha
lenges evidence that he has been, or is LIABLE
to any charge or suspicion of ndirection disho-
nor in this or in any act OF his life; and that the
accusations which, in this regard have been made
by Mrs Forrest, Mr.. Willis, and others, are utter
~ calumnIous, and wholly without foundation in
truth
And he says that the said Mrs Forrest alleges
an apprehension that this deponent will sell, con-
vey, part with, his real estate to defeat or rem
der unavailiDg any decree of this court, to the
contrary whereof, she knows that this deponent
has never sold any Of his real estate, and that
the said averment is utterly untrue, and unsus-
tanned by any fact or probability.
And he AYERS that the stateme mt made by Mrs.
Forrest, to wit, that this deponent said to Mr..
Lawson that there was no crime on her part,
and that he, the deponent, wished to God that
there were, is untrue that she herself made the
remark to Mr.. Lawson, as by his affidavit appears;
but that the deponent never uttered the language
thus ascribed to him, nor any language of a SINH
lar import.
And he says that the affidavit of Mrs Forrest
consent
from him. Her consent is expressly recognized in
her said letter to this deponent and she stated to
others, in conversation and writing, that the sepa-
ration was a matter of mutual arrangement, and
that the world had nothing to do with il.
And he AYERS that after the discovery of the
guilt of his wife, and the agreement Of the de-
ponent to shield her from shame, he treated her,
as she states, with compassionate kindness that
shortly previous to The sepa ration, she asked him
for copy of Shakspers, and that he told her to
select any one she wished from the library; that
she chose copy of the said work, and requested
the deponent to write her 10 it, as is stated in
her affidavit. He had always heretofore written
in the books presented to her, "From her lover
and husband, Edwin Forrest" but that, upon this
OCCASION he wrote, as she alleges, simply her name
and his own. That he also, al her request, and in
accordance with promise previously made, took
the plaintiff 10 Font Hill; and that though after the
discovery Of her guilt he could not regard her as
a wife, he treated her with the consideration and
gentleness due TO a woman
And he AYERS that the statement Of the said Ca
tharDe Forrest in relation to his said letter of the
24th OF December, 1919. is untrue. The said let
ter referred expressly to the fact Of her inideity
and if she had been innocent, or if the charge had
been new and unexpected" il would have met
an immediate and indignant denial but, on the
contrary, she did not, In her answer, alude to IL;
and II was only when urged by others, 10 avert the
Effect of this tac admission Of her guilt that she ad
ded supple mentary letter, denying the accusation
which had, upon conclusive evidence, been eleven
which she had entrested silence. and had consent
ed TO a separation.
And he AYERS that the law enacted by the Legis-
lature Of Pennsylvania, giving to the Court Of
Common Pleas of Philadelphia, jurisdiction of his
libel for divorce, was not, as stated by Mrs. For
rest, passed at his instance, or under any appica-
ton made by him. A number OF the members of
that body doubted the propriety Of passing bill OF
divorce in a case which was deemed open to the
action of the courts; and they manifested their
sense of the justice Of his claim for divorce, by
passing law giving the court jurisdiction in his
case.
And he says that the allegation of Mrs Forrest,
that she was natuFalIzed at the instance, and by
the counsel Of the deponent, is not true. That If
she be so naturaized, IL has been done at her own
instance, or that Of her legal adviser, from desire
TO secure supposed legal rights in relation TO the
properly Of the deponent, and not from any wish
to comply with his requests or by his counsel
And he says that the said Catbarine Forrest, as
he is informed and believes, declared to Mrs I'M
derwood, after this de ponent had commenced pro-
Greetings to obtain divorce, that che did not care;
that matters had gone 20 far, she was determined
TO brave IL out.
And he says that the statement of the said Mrs.
Forrest, that he eliminated desire that she
should go to Europe, and also that she should go
into some secluded place OF her own selection in
the country, 10 be more completely removed and
Put away from him, said Edwin Forrest, is untrue
That such propositions were made by her and re.
je ced by him, for the ssons heretofore stated.
And he further AYERS that, in the month Of Feb
ruary, he did, as stated by Mrr Forrest, see her IN
Sixteenth street; and he denies that she violently
revied" her; but he admits that in the course OF
the conversation mentioned by her, and which
took place on the street, he rebuked her for per-
hitting her sister, who was person of infamous
character, to reside in the house, and for enter
tanning, and giving supper parties to men OF proii
gse character, such as the said Captain Calcrafts
known rous and libertine. She answered,
"What shall | do 70 and the deponeni said that
she ought 10 exclude such persons from her house
she said, &c cannot do that but what shall |
DOR And the dePonent replied, that she could, II
she would, live virtuously, and that IL was better
to die than not 10 live so. The deponent objected
that persons, against whom he charged adulterous
conduct and conversation, were entertained upon
the money provided for her by him; and che re-
Piled that her sister contributed 81 800 year TO
the support Of the household; and the deponent
said that IL constituted with the sums paid by him,
the amount Of thirty. three hundred dollars per
mum, for the support Of tive females living apart
from their husbands and two children; but that
a. l..