The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-12-17

Mr. Forrest lives in II il s the pest pars Of two miles
fom whore live 20 Mr.. rovrcst's place.
children not .s n1sS =, r ,ss sIS
ing furnished or not Ihave not been BY 1t for twelve
MI. O'Conor We call the defendant Edwin Forrest.
tMfs Sinclair here left the oourt
Edwin Forrest was then called and being sworn and
Q-Did You knew Josephine Clifton formerly OF the
State Of New York.
NJ Van B.ren objected to thi: course:
The question was repeated. Al did; she is not now
fM two Or three years since she died don't know
how long 1t Is since heard Of her death Q-Csn you
| that ns ,oS 20 o% the oy
New York to New Orleans, in the year lS4s' Al be-
lieve did Q-was 1T in the spring Of that year A.
II think Il In the winter that started to go-tha
is, in the month Of January or February Q:-Had you
before that time the death Of Josephine Cton
Al believe had, but III net be sure. Oiled you
frequently performed in the pieces in
which Miss Clifton appeared actress? A Il have
Had you frequently travelled with her on long jour-
neys in the United Statesl A.-No; have traveled
With her but not frequently on long journeys; can't
tell about what time FIRST became acquainted with her
can't tell II II was subsequently TO my marriage with
Mrs Forrest am introduced to great numbar of per-
cons, and can't recelect may have been introduced
to her before my marriase think WAS but III not be
sure can't say positively that recolect seeing her
before my mar &c: have positive recollection but
think it very likely that did. Q-aave you ev'r,
course With Josephine Clifton
Mr.. Van Buren-Ws object to the question impro
per because the answer may mpicste the witness lie
IA bo' bound to answer the question: has the counsel
any right to ask II.
Mr. 0'Oonor oontended that the question wa. adms.
poee Of showing that the defendant bound
the question in his to the complaint and If he
bias omitted 10 1t In his answer then contend
that by legal conseq he ought to IL
The want OF answer may embzrrass U.s. because tho
evidence may not have as much weight with the jury,
refer TO the section OF code which states all the
allegations not denied in the answer admitted.
him in q friony but Is compelled 70 answer question
involving . misdemeanor. Counsel also referred
70 section 3ao-3il OF the code, to show that
party 10 q suit may be compelled to testify any
other witness. Also 70 section 4s5 There is rule
that witness may decline 20 answer question which
would tend 10 degrade him; but on that take issue.
II has been decided in England nor in this State
be believed anywhere else, that where question 10
msser,M 70 IN. sas s, , AZ noer.y 20 Seenne
II the wness says no. then II does not degrade him ii
he snver. res then seems that the interests of jus
jury should Be informed Of II.
Mr. Van Duren ssia that husband cannot be wit
nss 70, .. sfsinst his s u. Ms san ss,en) would
Mr. oConor continued TO cite stsrkie Evidence in
support Of his views lie referred 10 Ia. ancient Of
Lord Audley In Ensand who for having procured the
preparation of gross outrage bis wife indicted
with his accomPlices or instruments, and the wife
admitted q against husband Lord Aulley
convicted and hanged
Mr.. Van Buren,, in r-ply did not mean to argue the
privilege Of tho witness II would be time enough to do
80 when be claims the privilege Of declining to
The question put has been answered By the wit
In bis answer under oath, 20 the times
aud places specified in the complaint and he (eounse
no other mode that could have been dontd in the
answer The argument Of Mr.. o'Conor would have
been proper II the witness had declined to but
alone object the universal rule which prohibits a
wife being q witness sgant her husband or husband
asant his vfe-a rule which has but one exception As
being joined by her husband but there an express
statute which permits her n Of this kind TO
alone But does not follow that the rule preserving
the confidence between husband and wife shall be vio
lated IL rule founded the good order Of society
and has but one exception, AMI that IL where per-
sonsi injury Is iancted there the law allows the wife
to become witness to protect her from personal vo
lence. Counsel referred to Al vol Of Howard, p /,
where the precise question was presented.
cerned the question has been decided in this Court As
to the general principle that wife cannot b. q Wit
After some further remark, from Mr Van Buren'
The Chief Justice said that the witness Is called upon
to give evidence in favor OF his wife because asked
would be- that Mrs Forrest would be entitled 10 d.
vorce against him. That husband cannot b. q wit
for his wife has been ruled time OF miad IL
is simply this 1t does not 20 upon the principle OF
interest," stands upon hishsr grounds II rests upon
the ground that the Law will not allow HUSBAND
cause 1t would lead to dou.es;ic quausls, domestic
orois, and be entirely destructive 81 domestic psase
tons 1t IL con.ezded here that these ex.mpoas are
personal violence and personal wrong whore there
is no other evidence fcr procesdns' IN cour Ths
alluded 10 In the Enslsh books 4 OF th5se sxcsp.
tons The husband there Indicted for the pEocge-
rept Of grevous personal wrong his wife snl she
vas admitted wness against him but The prln sips
Of thai rule when II comes TO BE- arslyzed
this:--Ilere Il case of peculiar chNact.rof wife
against husband seeking tes ditorce IL "a personal
vropg-s personal injury Of the hgse; charger But
seems to that Il Is CT those cfss ia vah tie
exception 20 the rule ought % b applied 81. there are
other view, In the matter The party Is called up3i te
the laws Of this state indicabls offence There Ia
however Limitation 70 the incct-eat prescribed b.
Law. II IL appears that Mr. forrrs. guilty Of this
offence II must have been thsa years ago sup
ne could not be indicted for II II would BE- taking
Ii. matter very nicely hevev,r, % compel him @
put to the Inconvenience q prosecution! 1; IL q
rule that no man can b. COMPELLED 10 answer
question invcving an indictsble efepcs Whs.her
Mr. Forrest could be put &c the necessity a. az
svering that charge i would hesitate Ions before
! would compel man % answer qaesron which
answer made in the reply TO the complaint, tbs lss
assumes that IL an admission ~, the court make
no decree such sdmission-- must b proved under
oath For what purpose then DO you call upon b
question which the court cannot act upon, ~
the sdmis'ion be confession, and svas anything 10
upon the records Ii the charge IL dlnisd and he is
called upon TO answer the question Ia way
may be indicted for perjury and 10 1. rule thst
subject him 10 such charge For ali these DO
think Mr. Forrest IL bound % answer, but gene-
men think proper viii bear them a. 70 Mr.. Forrest.
right TO decline 70 answer. i think upon e1lstsra
matters party cannot refuse 10 answer.
Mr. o'Conor was then head, and argued ~ nsider-
able length TO the nitstoa. He cited agtho
rites and concluded about four O'Clock
The Chief Justice said that he word dispose % the
question In the morning lie said the time for slourn
ment had nos arrived and perhaps Il would not be
oesry for him TO state 20 tie jury the necessity q
guarding against the approach q any person this
subject. III such an attempt was made he hoped the
jury would have hesitation In communis atng the
name Of the party TO the Court. They would not
among themselves the subject and thsy would
keep their minds A. uncommittet a. possible until tie
whole was tried.
Adjourned to 10 O'Clock Wednesday (this norning)