The New York herald., 1850-12-27


the truth, !. e., that the assigned cause, and the
only cause of which had any knowledge or assu-
rance, was my contradicung Mr., Forests remark
about her. In the next place, Mr.. Forrest has ne
ver offered any proof of the said assertion, made
by him on information and belief; and if he had
any informant he could produce him. Prior to
December 24tb, lSi9, never did directly or ndi-
rectly ascrbe our separation to the misconduct OF
Mr. Forrest, unless the above statement TO my sis
ter was such ascription, or alleged that 1t arose
70 hi IL suy he
the cause of said separation. insist that if any
one did impute our separation to disagreement
about the Macready controversy, it would have
been an advantage TO Mr.. Forests repstation. All
ms inends knew that the separation was his act ;;
he says that he meant TO assign no reason for il,
and had promised me, In case Of no new delinquen-
cy on my part, 10 write and defend me against any
insult appeared to be innocent and unm--
peached wife, put away without any cause by the
arbitrary will of husband. This would have
placed Mr.. Forests character and conduct ia the
worst light that could have been refiec;ed upon IT,
IL was, submit, an extenuatioH of his apparent mis-
conduct, If any one, in charity towards him, repre-
sented that we had a disagreement about the Ma
crtady business, which induced separation. 1
would observe further on this head :-It was easy
TO see that the public would impute our separation
to that, sSail il no other was assigned for it.
Any would expect it, told Mr.. Forrest that
expected H.
think can prove clearly that he never believed
me TO be author of any such representation, an0 =
that the vndication of his character from this OF
any other mputaton had nothing 10 do with HE d.
application for a divorce. as he now untruly pre-
| tends.
His COUNSEL and mine, met on the twenty
ninth of January, 1850, stated in my former aii
dayit. am informed by my counsel, and verify
believe, that the counsel of Mr. Forrest suggested
| that very gently insinuated charges of deviatoag
from stIictprepriety, not recognizable at law, would
probably be deemed sufficient by the legislative
| committee, and that Mr.. Theodore Sedgwick, pro-
Tossing to act for Mr. Forrest gave my counsel the
most positive assurances that even these charges
and the proofs by which they might be made to
pass should be scrupulously couce aled aud forever
hidden from The public view. My counsel, as | am
| informed and believe, TO the great dissatisfaction
Of MIR. Sedgwick, replied that to conceal the legis
lative action OF sovereign State, seemed 10 him
vain undertaking that if attempted and otherwise
practicable, the public attention would be drawn
TO this apparently groundess divorce, and not only
| the me mbers of the LEGISLATURE but Mr.. Forrest
himself, would be constr rained in their own just6.
cation 10 publish the grounds, the proofs, and Mrs
| Forests consent, amounting to a virtual confes-
son My counsel has his correspondence with
| Mr.. Sedgwick, dated in January and February,
1850 and can prove all these facts fully. Ihave
| the written proposition of Mr.. Forests counsel,
| Mr. Sedgwick, sent TO me through Mr.. William
G. Bryant, in February, 1850, one clause of which
"Fourthly-M Mr.. Forrest will pledge hi mself to
some mutual friend, that he will NOT give any pub
lciiy TO The charges or testimony adduced in the
application and will prevent any publicity being
given them by others now or hereafter. He en-
cages, also, that the application will be couched in
contain no charges which may be necessary to the
object of obtaining divorce.
"Mr. Sedgwick will, at any time that may be
desired, communicate with Mr.. O'Conor in rela-
uon 10 this matter"
1t will be seen, therefore. that "the object" Of
all his threats and invectyes, from the 24th OF De-
cember, 1919, to the middle of February, 1850, was
| rot TO yindicate his character, as he now repre-
| sents, but for " obtaining a divorce" / do not
| think Mr. Forrest go weak as TO abandon his wife
in New York, and TO seek from the Legislature of
anOfhpr Sfof la ayn fpU hio chs raofaY
from her reproaches. His object must have been
| different.
When Mr.. Forrest called at Mr. Godw house,
on the 3lst OF May, 1919, 10 see me, he said that
he should, in all probability. remove his sisters
from Philadelphia TO Font Hill, some time during
the summer, and that they were to keep house for
him there. ! am informed and believe, that he
continued the building finishing OF the large
house, and some time during the month of No
vember, lsi9, purchased additional furniture for
AS Mr. Forrest chooses to make public our in.
tercourse in relation to his controversy with Mr..
Macre ady, will state the facts.
We certainly had serious differences about Mr..
| Forests conduct towards Mr.. Macready. I
strongly disappoved Of his hissng Mr.. Macready
in Edinburgh, in 1896 and demonstrated with him
| for the manner in which he spoke Of Mr. Macready
prior to his (Macready's) arrival in this country 10
| 1878. objected to Mr.. Forests habit OF stating
| on all occasions, in promscuous companies, his
determination to have Macready driven from the
stage, and to MIR. Forests leaving money at Bos-
| ton, and sending some TO New Orleans, in lSlS,
for the furtherance of the above object, as Mr.
| Forrest informed me he had done.
Mr.. Forrest frequently became very angry with
| me about this, as he attributed the part took in
| the matter, to my English feeling. | repeatedly
assured him II was not so, but that thought he
| compromised his own dignity by the violence of
| his opposition. When, however, Mr.. Macready
made speech which conveyed to my mind an in.
suit TO my husband, felt, a. wife, most anxious
| that he should resent IL. When | wrote to Mr.
Forrest, well knowing the state Of excitement an.
| der which he was laboring. said everything
could to encourage, and nothing to oppose him.
On ny joining him In Philadelphia, In the autumn
OF ls4S, he asked me again to tell him more
| particularly, how / approved of his "card."
then said regretted he had inserted any epithets
upon wnch % ne became very ,ngy and blamed me
him what was true, that preferred speaking any
thing which might not be agree cable, TO writing Il
especially under the circumstances, when surely II
was not the part OF wife TO add TO his vexations
that when many joined In blaming him, even II
had thought him more in the wrong than did,
could not say so. The terms Mac super
Forests own words and letters. His said letters
are IN my possession.
Mr.. Forrest was wrought up to such state OF
excitement about Macreedy, that his friends feared
lest he should utterly lose his reason, and could
not have attempted TO control or oppose him.
never urged him to violent measures against
Mr.. Macready.
III had impsted our separation to the Macready
controversy, IL is not certain that should have
done Mr. Forrest any injustice. | can hardly i'm
puie 80 grave an act to the canse assigned. His
angry and vindctive passions appeared to be daily
gathering new strength, and acquiring most per-
feet control over him, from the moment when the
English. public in 1876, influenced in whole or In
part, as he supposed, by Mr. Macready, appeared to
slight him. had not approved his course against
Macready, unqualihedly and In all things, and
might well have attributed the separation TO this
cause. But there were other causes, and | could
not be sure what was the leading one, or whether
II was not result OF many causes. ! had ample
reason to believe that Mr.. Forrest was in corres-
pondence with a woman Of respectable connections.
but Of bad reputation.
To this cause, in fact, In my own mind, mainly
attributed his desertlon, and my hope OF reclamng
him hung upon the slender expectation that he
might become tired of that attachment.
Although during the period subsequent 20 our
return from Europe in 1876, my strong affection for