The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-05-29

~ =: sss - . !. S.v a: ss::
house. ted ny Old woman that Vas his wife; they
aysd ct my house an hour and then 20 their own
house; Invent thece the eae and The next day; they
In Partnership they lived together Is man and WIFE and
sti dol while was in partnership plaintiff there;
,ssd s My os.S the PAT and boy called and
called; showed her up stairs to defendsnt,s room.
OBren was sick he moti0ned with his hand for us to
stairs and left Miss Richards there she stayed there
don't know how long, about ten minutes did not hear
Mrs O'Brisn say any thing to Miss Richards.
returned from tho West Indies.
John Richards deposed-Am brother Of plaintiff in this
suit and reside in this city, our mother is dead but
father living he Is rising Of So knew defendant In
May, 1S49 he boarded with me- saw him after he
left me, in February, 1885, he to Mr. Woods in
first at my house in ls40 he asked mo If would con
sent for her to marry; told him she Of age
and she could answer for herself; had nothing to
say; saw defendant often after that board his
brig OF which he mate after that he went to Bos-
tom saw him In the summer ensuing; him at the
shipping office; after his return had talk with
him about my sister sometime in March, 1851
Mrs Brown told me she (Painti) in the famNywsy
met him at the corner of Rutgers and West streets and
told him my sister wanted to see him, and asked him
what he had been doing he acknowledged what he had
done and said that he intended to marry her. and always
denied 1t and promised to marry plaintiff on the Friday
night following my sister was present at this latter
versation; told him he must do something very SOON
four FIVE days after met him in the shipping Office
he told me unwel and bury, and appointed another
time about week ahead to marry herr he did not keep
house, sent boy in TO ask him OUT he did not come,
and then went in myself Mrs, OBJ few at me and hit
without my hat; Qaughter) called there again;
saw him often after that, not at his house. but
in business; ! know defendants handwriting Qetters
shown by witness) tho signatures all 0'Brens;
Crossexamned-Is defendant write aboard the brig
be mate Of in the cabin he writing letters
him write at my house also sat alongside Of him in the
oabin did not look his shoulder when he wroe we
went away together think he wrote to friends in
Boston; saw him write himself reference At my
house in tho bar room, in 1849; stood beside him in
the bari the Captain required reference and he wrote
one himself looked at it while he writing he signed
name ar tho bottom Of 1t; do not know what name;
have seon him sign notes tho North river when TAX
ing In cargo he showed me his logb0ok at the same
tme believe defendant invited to the ship;
did not offer defendant 800 II he would marry my SIS
ter but offered him house to live In which had lease
Of he would marry her that Friday he had promised
never said anything about money but objected to the
match the ground THAI was too short notice. they
did not know each others characters well enough know
one Tom Day he went to church once with my sister;
don't know of their going out together before or
since never beard they were married. he boarded long
time with US.
wife, In consequence of any improper intimacy between
yourself and sister? Overruled
Witness continued-Mr. Marks boarded with me eleven
or twelve years; my sister kept company went
out with him, to my knowledge
Direct-My sister and her father lived with during
the time Marks boarded with me-
Counsel for plaintiff here offered in evidence tho let
ters, which objected TO by defsndants COUNSEL
tho ground that the handwriting had not been suoenty
proved.
The Court-That Is for the jury to say.
The letters then read; they full Of strong
professions but did not bear the impress of very
fined or intellectual mind.
Michael Smith ON the part Of defence, and de-
posed that he resided in Cedar street, knows defendant
and had him write from my knowledge Of his writ
ing the letters shown resemble his handwriting,
but viii not positively to their being his
not
There being other witnesses in court the part
Of the defendant the testimony here closed and the
summed up the respective parties to the jury
who brought in 9 verdict for the plaintiff $4,000
damages.
fiction for Libel Emery Matthews Noses s. and Al
fred T.. Bs0ch-This action for libel The plain
tit sued the defendants for libel former OCCASION
which consisted in police report published in the Sun
newspaper The present action is for the republication
of that libel in the proceedings of the last trial. and
ments on the case. Adjourned