The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-06-05

daughter and the said Nathaniel p. Willis
contained any disclosure, admission, or evidence
course between her and the said Nathaniel r.
Willis That he oensured the said Willis for
having engaged in said correspondence, and also
eensured his daughter for having been, party
he never, to deponent's knowledge or belief, re-
gsrded IL otherwise than act of indiscretion.
And deponen says, that he never heard it alleged
that the said plaintiff, Mary l., had been seduoed
hcation Of the article in the New York Courier and
En- nlro, of the fifteenth day Of May, instant, en-
titled " The London, Times, the Day Book, and the
Home Journal" to which article the attention Of
this deponent called early on the morning Of
the day Of publication thereof, and throughout the
day. and for several succeeding days. ~ referring
the said Mary i.
And deponent says, that some time after the
surrender OF said notes letters by said Willis,
the said Henry lnman was DESTROYS that the
same should be handed TO him and be in his
possession and for that purpose requested deponent
TO call on the said James Watson Webb and OBJ
and that deponent did accordingly, at the request
Of said Henry Imam, call On tho said James Wat
son Webb, and inform him Of the desire Of said
Henry lnman, and request him to deliver said notes
OF letters to deponent to be BY him banded to said
Henry lnman. That in reply to such request, the
said Webb stated to deponent that he would look
them up and deliver send them to the said Henry
lnman, but as dep0nent believes, he never did do
liver or send them to the said Henry Inman.
And this deponent says, that after the death Of the
said Henry Inman, his widow, Jane Inman, the mo-
Their ofthe plaintiff Mary being DESTROYS Of obtain
Ing the possession Of said notes letters requested
depopent again to call on the said James Watson
Webb, and obtain the same and hand them 10 her
That deponent again called on said James Watson
Webb, and informed him tina; the said Jane Innan
desired to have the said notes letters in her pos
session. and requested him to deliver them to depo-
nent. for the purpose of their being handed TO the
eaid lana INnnau nd N raplv IN
said James Watson Webb stated that he would
look them up and deliver send them over, as re-
quested; but, as deponent believes, he never COM
pile with his promise.
And this deponent says, that the said notes
and letters were delivered by the said Natha-
MEL z. Willis to the said ] imes Watson Webb
on the express trust to deliver the same to
the said Henry lnman, and for no other pur-
pose, to deponent's knowledge and belief; and
that deponent has never read or become acquainted
with the contents Of the same, any or either Of
them, nor should this deponent have considered
himself at liberty to have opened the package and
notes or letters, had the said package been deliver
ed to him. And further this deponent saith rot
GEO. BUcKHAM
Sworn this 3lst day of May, 1851, before me,
GEO. Z. NELSON, Com. Of Deeds.
AFFIDAVIT OF MRS. HENRY INsfAS
S,rith Coddington and Mary L. ms rife against
James Watson WeJb.-Cay and County Of Ncw
York, ss:--Jane Inman, of Hampstead, Queens
county, in the State Of New York, being duly
sworn, says that she is the widow of Henry INN an
late Of the city of New York, deceased; and that
the plaintiff, Mary l., is the daughter of depo-
nent and Of said Henry Inman; and this deponent
says, that the discovery by her and the said Henry
lnman that her daughter, the said plaintiff, Mary
L., had, unknown to them been engaged in CORES
pondence with Nathaniel p. Willis, did not, nor
did any other facts circumstances excite in their
minds any belief suspicion that the plaintiff Mary
l. had been seduced by said Wills or that any cri-
had Lave kap MIA haar
temPlated BY the said plaintiff, Mary and the said
Nathaniel p. Willis. That the said Henry Inman and
deponent considered such correspondence an act Of
thong htessness and indiscretion which, although
highly censurable, attributable to the extreme
outh and inexperience Of the plaintiff, Mary /.
And deponent says, that from she time Of such dis
covery down to the death Of the said Henry In
man, she had the most free, full, and unreserved
conversation with him regarding such correspon-
ence, andthe conduct and character of their daugh
ter, the plaintiff, Mary l., and was fully aoauaint.
ed with his views and opinions respecting the same
and she is thereby enabled to state, positively and
without reserve, that the said Henry Inman never,
at any time, entertained any doubt or suspicion Of
the purity of their said daughter, Mary |.
And this deponent further says that the allegation
of the death Of the said Henry Inrnan having been
caused or htstened by knowledge or belief OF the
seduction Of the plaintiff, Mary l., is entirely un-
rue. And deponent says that she never believed or
entertained the thought suspicion that the said
plaintiff, Mary l., had been sedueed or was other
wise than chnste and viTtuous, and that she no
ully and firmly believes her said daughter to be-
md to have always been, chaste and virtuous Aud
iepoDent says, that neither che the said Henry
Imam were ever DESTROYS of obtaining the notes
ettsrs which had been written by the plaintiff
Mary l., TO the said Nathaniel T. Willis fro IN any
belief, fear, suspicion that tho same
'ontased any admission or evidences of the seduo-
ion OF the plaintiff, Mary l., or could in any way
impair or Affect her reputation for chastity or
virtue; but that both the said Henry nmAn and
ieponent were DESTROYS of obtaining possession q
aid notes and letters, from feeling Of tho impro-
oriety OF permitting notes or letters, written by
Toung and inexperienced girl, without the know
edge of her parents, to remain in the hands Of
he said Nathaniel z. Willis, or of any person.
hat IT WAS for that reason, aud NOT with any be-
ict or fear or suspicion. that the said notes let
ers did or might contain any proof admission af
Getting the virtue chastity of tho plaintiff, Mary
that the said Henry lnman, In hts lifetime, and
ieponent, after his decease, requested eorge Bnck
am, who had, for several year,, boon "A very init
nate and confidential friend Of said Henry lnman
md deponent, to call on the defendant james Wat
ION Webb, and obtain and deliver to them, re- |
pectiyely, the notes letters OF tho aid plpintih
Mary l., which had been handed by the sad Ma
haniel Il. Willis TO the said james Watson Webb, /
o be delivered up to the said Henry lnman.
Aud further this deponent saith not.
jazz INsAy
Sworn this Both day of May, 1861, before rae,
Go l.. NELSON, Commissioner OF Daeds
AFFIDAVIT on HoLBERr stALrs. ESQ.
Sntth Co,airgton and H1,g T., his uqfe, sg1iHa
tihres Watson jptJ5 GUY and County NJ yec /
'mk, ss.-Hobert Smales, Of said city, being duly
worn says, that At tho request aud by direction OF
be plaintiffs ia this action, deponeut, the twenty
ret day OF May thousand eight hundred and iity.
ne, called ON the defendant. James Watson Webb I
{ biz office IN Wall street, in the city Ut Ne. YORK
nd in the names and behalf ct the plaintiffs de.
handed the notes or letters mentioned in the com
LIANT IN this action but the said James Watson I
Webb did not deliver the same, Or any Of shcm, to
oponcnt then or at amy time
ANA deponent save, that, in answer t. such de- /
nand, the said James Watson Webb seated he
'Ould deliver said notes letters TO the plaintiff
NTH oddington, or to the plaintiff, Mary |. Cod.
ington, at the proper time. ILL., s,eIALgS
sworn before NV this 10Th day Of May, 1851.
MM. IA. SrAEEs, Conmis. " Deeds
SCHEDULE a.
THE LoND1N 1iMks, rtE DAY BOOK, AND rnE
loME JOURNAL The personal abuse rhicn may