The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-10-24
THE FORREST DIVORCE CASE
Supreme Couyt-GenerniT.ss

THE FORREST DIVORCE CASE.
Supreme COuyt-Generni TSpus.
cATHARINE N. FORREST VS.. EDWIN FORREST.
Der % The argument in this cause wos resumed
this morning Mr.. Oconor commenced by strtih that
the case as far as regards the apple
decision made bers No new or additional fact
presents itself except the fsct that defendant night
have answered II he could, the made by the
plaintiffs but he has failed to give any to the
charges made against him. The heard at q
special term, the papers merely read Justice Ed
ward', and counsel upon that occasion, addressed hts
Honor very briefly an lrcely thing said by
the counsel who opened the case and now think IL
would hardly become to hunt up game tor the
mere pleasure of running it down myssf therefore
the proceedings before Judge Edwards scarcely de-
serves the name Of an argument. Upon that argu.
meut, 1t may be so called, his Honor made order,
which Is new brought here for review, and
in accompanying his decision with the con-
are prudent ones, the case now comes here to
be deliberately heard by the whole court The
general facts they present themselves to the Court
can be stated in few words As before stated the
complaint contains three Of action The first,
endowment the other, conducting hns slf towards
her in such manner that his conduct ade 1t unsafe
for her TO cohsbt or live with him; and the third
cause, which have stated to be one without prece.
dent in this Court is one spprehend which Is en-
titled to high Consideration and one which thi Coart
will sanction. Now let what the IL as 1t
presents itself under those three forms of action IT,
then, this third cause has precedent In Courts
IL has at least, precedent in constitution Mr..
o'coner then referred TO which occurred before
Britain claimed the right of porting it's s1bjests
hey ond the to have them tried By foreign juris-
octon and said that the trial Of one Of those
IL veil said that although might vary, prin
ciFlss were immutabe. He then asked did not the
application in this itself to the favora
Bile consideration OF the Court which based
upon the eternal principles Of justice Nov let
the grounds Of The original application. We find
citizen OF the nted States Who from hu IA bl, be-
gins ing. by the force OF his genius, raises for
himself high name and great fame; surrounded
BY those attributes he goes to the mother couu-
to- to- all n-st.
and there iorms eonDexion with young lady nine
teen years Of age, and Transports her-wnere! Not,
certainly into the wilds Of the but into that
gion Of tbe country rhere Of all others she had
to suppose she would obtain protection against all
outrage that might be- offered to her, where there
well Establishes tribunals for the firm aud unbiased
alton ef law Tor all who require it, pro-
tectos and especially for wife who has been desert
ed by her husband Under thsse auspices she is
to this city aud resides here until she
the age thirty and her husband to forty We when
he becomes til ed OF his wife We dnd him then trump
up charge against her, and remove his residence to
smother State and select that amongst them all
a. the best suted 10 his purpose We nd him select.
ing his ratve state whore he could be OF its in.
ffueDce in favor of his Interest lie applies to Legi-
lstur. which IL undoubtedly much under lobby in
and IN such manner As to obtain n judgment which
would AT least have the appearance OF grave and
lsnn in.trumenti but e',n there be tailed. His
reAt application Is TO the Court OF Common Pleas
OF Philadelphia, which am wiling admit is not so
rcFr,heushle as the hrs and his seeoad application,
have no doubt, will be iruitess his trst
sure that that court " i'll jurislietion
In sueha case "here no appearance or defence made
Now be- might as we'll 90 before tho County Court Of
Kalamazoo II there BE- such place. and think there
II county Of that name Ia Michigan IL would Just
well TO 90 there for that court would bay. lbs. a.
much jurisdiction County court 10 PepnsyIysnis
Counsel vert ON TO argue that hrs Forrest had
the Interpolation % this court It the bounden
duty Of their houors to iD.rpo=e their thorty and
give Der protection. They have shown that all toe
been committed In this State Tney have also shown
that all the witnesses reside In this stse aud that
impossible Tor he. TO bring them State
OF Pennrylvanis We have also shosn o. II we're
really Necessary to do 50 that Mr. FORESTS object
selecting the state OF Penny for oppression
and TO obtain an unfair advantage over hts wife -
Your honors know (said couussl) that it would be
useless for us to apply 70 tho courts In philadelphia %
change the venue tlty would net lRten To such an
application. Moreover such ~ step would subject
Ourselves to the danger OF coming within their uris
diction, and place us completely Mt the mercy OF
foreign tribunal however slight It's m,ans Of doing
Juntice. We have therefore shown that this IL
coming within thoeqsity power Of the conrt end calls
tsrfere by the sfrrft OF the person In order % restrain
him. bis eonied,rGes from prosecuting his wife
except In the tribunals Of this state wh,ro all bic Wit
netses ere aud where he can have fui and perfect
remedy for any wrong he nav nave suffered
Mr. John Van Bur.n. ON the pari Of the defendant,
theu ose aLd addressed The court Va support ct tn-
molten In the remarks which shall make. he snii,
this occasion shall endeavor e. conhn- myself
nearly rosthle to the question presented before
court. The extraordinary course taken by tho com
plainant the multiplicity OF the bills dlsd sui the
different KINDS OF relief sou qht are 80 spv tts II was
supposed there would be difhculty "a presenting
TIE merits 81 the 20 the court however much
oifhcult u may De TO present them % the public in
such away a. TO prevent III" defendant from being
pref udicednow that appeal has been made the
community 20 decide this controversy and preferred
the court The hes been notified this dty that the
community were watching the disposition they might
make oi THE ~ y for to say, that
10 = highly improper tost the community should take
ttis course. We have come bei.re thu Court With
sim fla afiesvit stating that the defendant
rested on wrri ne ,rsai, and our motion Is TO d.
charge that wtbecauss the code has abolished g. In
. ut hfrk A ma 10
Fhow thG untfuth ~ msby a the contained
in the complaint The Court hsve been referred 70 the
britt AFFIDAVIT IN when this motion sds at sps
einl term. 10 was simply sfndsvt that ar.
reeted on writ 81 sssof, sud that we applied 20
have " Discharged ana in sny susR-stinrs ! may
have % rake IN this case. don't intrnd to impute 90
tho presiding judge ~hO Issued that writ, any dispo
Niion 70 leoone party TO hnrIass the defendant.
know that in an parte proceeding ~ this Kind 70
may happen With the beet deposition In the World
that the court may Inadvertently commit an act which
In st onect may be an oppression on tls rights 81
citizen, aud such. ] conceive this act to be That
may happen from insdveTtsEee. and I have NJ d0ubs
that It did happen IN that wsy in this case uow Ear
those Who we're AUXILIARY TO these proceedings have
the same apology don't nos propose TO discuss I
VII also state hat the AFFIDAVIT made to sustain the
complaint In this csG- bas nothing AZ all 20 DO With
the present motion, snd of your lI0nors viii
expect Of counsel 10 shov ths 10 the court The
tlsint sworn 90 on the Second day OF September
1850. sud the AFFIDAVIT was sworn % on the sane day
Nov, without stopping 10 inquire hoE far the an tavt
was proper a. paper On which to founl The inIu
ton, have simply 10 say the ,rsa should have
been founded on the complaint, II onauythiug When
the ahi6svt was read In the eogyt below chiec'ed
to 30, but u vas reid IN opposition to motion.
Not~ithstsndirg when IL was read sgsiu. di not
object to IL. Besides would not deny % counsel the
Qualification Of reading 70 THIS occasion But still
feel tuusd TO take the ghection that " has nothing
Of al 20 dc With this nation The obiectjOn We make
10 this witt T., In the hrst place that the complaint
GOES not present any case neither does the aih-
dSvit, which would make Il proper - Issue sis n
writ and In order 20 look, very briefly, at
TIE correctness ofthis position IL will Ne necessary 10
ref 20 uhat the bn Is iptended TO 30 TIE second
Revived Statutes vaEe ST. section o. provides for
decree for limited divorce. aud separation uuier
tain circumstances There hrst, cruel and inhu-
nan treatment sesondly ruch conduct on the part
ofthe husband as would render unsafe aud iupro-
rtr for the wife 10 cohabit with him thirdly aban-
dchnent and refusal TO provide fer her. Ire com
plant IN this case uadtrtakss TO state two ot these
for limited divorce ana separate mainteuasce
ptandenmtnt - the wife b. IN husband aud the re-
fussl 10 provide Ger her sud, secondly inhumaa
trsstueut a the wife ~ the hushaDI % sseN coo.
duet renders u i'm proper for hsrto cchsbit With