New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-06-28

siitu,e a SUI, to recover damages and defendant has
stated he needs the letters for the purpose oftefeni
INK himself IN that SUIT. ] Sabmlt 20 his COUNSEL
they can be Of USE % HIM IN the SUIT Can those let
terS alone. even admitting them contain state
mcniS as o. her and Wills, bo evidence IN the cause
most aSSredlv thew cannot, without some other evi
dence OF the truth OF the charges II they relied
upon. Col Web, viii b wholly desolate OF a de-
Tense.
But admitting they are material 20 has defense ami
admitting that ne has placed himself IN SucA posi-
ton thai he cannot defend himself nom prOSec0-
ton and shield himself rom exemplary damages ex-
ccpt by presenting these letters and allowing thh
the sanction Of the Court would D. gwen 10 ther
produCton-COl Webb has stated m ms ahiavit
that the letters not delivered 10 han as trust,
express OF implied take u ms meaning IS not
Trust that ne should not open ard read them himself
Il - probable thatWaS The extent 81 the conf lcncc
they willing that The letters should be rcat-he
has the extraordinary privilege OF opening ana read
Ing the lcitsrS-bUi aSSurctly Col. Ncoo never
meant To say. nor can any person believe that they
were - delivered 10 hm--thtt they sie ms property,
q Be used by HIM m any manner he mghl tMnA prop
er. ANer ms personal inspection ne must nave oeen
aware hat the contents OF these letters were not tcbe
made known by HIM 20 any living being whatever
and that by making them known. OF even by reading
them hlmSci he WAS guilty Of breach OF confidence
sacred IS ever has been imposed upon man
What was The object Of the father in getting him IN
obtain The letters from Willis IL VS. 10 prevent
Willis from destroying the character OF the daughter
and he peace Of the parent and = u not mon>fous
20 say that after he obtained them he himself could
make he same use Of them n he should ever thnA
proper 10 90 50
I: thew have become necessary for defense. Il u a
necessity which he himself has created, ana he can
not tke advantage OF them 20 defend himself nom
charge which he had no right 20 make.
Il nav be sand. the Is not now before u.s.
that these NAV De out of place but they are
not made As 20 defendant or his council with any
spirit OF mklndnes>, but IN the hope that they may
Letters aS6 fq ah T nee, u S indicate a, s Ss
m defense and II he and ms counsel agree that
have stated fairly the case, why not put an end al
once Ia the controversy by following a course which
will be both proper and effective Let hun deliver
those letters waving all technical questions which
may ariSC-Whcther ne has a night 10 those techni-
calltCS or notle him At once deliver the letters 10
Mrs Coddmgton, without any condition, restriction
or reSCr alton whateycr-bcing satisfied that BY 50
domg he viii fulfill the purpose for which they we're
delivered INTO ms hands snd he Will nov AT least
comply with the trust and a lar As m his power
make rcparailon for the wrong IN the first instance
he committed.
Mr Horace F. Clarke. Counsel for Mrs C., asked
the Court 10 permit him 10 say one wond-he would
ask that Col Webb be enJoined from any reiteratlon
of the contents of the cttcrS-the learned Judge
was mistaken m SupposDg the cNposuoa OF the
letters was restricted To literal exposition OF them
we want something more than thlt-and Mrs. Cod
dngton thinks that Mr. Webb has done her very
great injustice by stating the contents
Judge SandioTd replied that they could not make
any further order herc-the application must be IN
special term-the matter is pending, IN TACT before
HIM, individually.
Hiram ketchum ESQ Counsel for Col W. SAID
he would here ask II the letters would not be sub
Jet 10 the control OF the Court We may nave
occasion Ia use the contents or not. III was re.
Piled that they would be one OF the learned
Judges has thought proper to indicate mode when
viii give the Counsel on the other side an OPP
bortunty to alter his complaint The tonnsel mas
seen fit To set forth IN his complaint that Mrs Cod
dlugton IS entirely pure-not guilty OF any impro-
priety of conduct. Was II necessary or proper Tor
HIM to put such an allegation in, unless he asks the
Court 10 strike that allegation out It must be con
sldered as being part OF the complaint. Does the
Counsel intend 10 do so
lT clark We do Motive rest upon that as the
strongest part OF our case.
lT k-rhen It forms an issue which we must adj
NIT OF deny | am here 10 say, a. SAID before, thM
We do not want to make that an isSue-we would DO
do anytang possible 10 avoid II. We do not meanto
imply any insinuauon of what course We shall lake,
but my learned friend says he insists upon leaving
that there.
Mr.. CT do.
Nr. K-Well, If he leaves that-wc ask to have II
struck out-a We can do IS TO answer u ana We
shall not answer 1t, unless compelled TO do so ana
If we 90 We think shall answer II on such grounu
as we can maintain and If Il is necessary TO use
them for what | should ask, what Court on ear'h
could have a right to prevent II
JHdge Sand(ord If such comes before me- snail
order Il TO be struck out
Mr. K.--I suppose your Honor will not, unless oy
s5f ov~sssrsl
J1dgs 81 shall do so, whether Wy mOtivn Not.
Some little more was said, and the Court pro-
cccdod TO the decision OF other cases.