The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-01-08
THE FORREST DIVORCE CASE.
superior Co nrt.
Before Chief Justice Oakley.

cArHAHINE 4. FORREST vs.. FoRREsr.
SIXTEENTH DAY.
JAN 6-Mr Forrest was in attendance, and Mrs. N. p
Willis accompanied Mrs. Forrest. There very few
persons in court It being found necessary for safety to
prevent the room from being crowded.
Mr. Theodore sedgwick again called to the stand
and explained that he had searched up letters
had any negotiation with any other party previous
to the interview with Mr.. O'Conor; the interview
with Mr.; 0Conor was on Tuesday, the ssth January,
1850 and The interview with Mr.. Bryant after
that stated to Mr.. O'Conor that our desire and
intention to apply to the Legislature of Pennsylvania
for divorce; Mr. Randall who Understood those things
came explain; supposed 1t would be necessary
for US to make charge against Mrs Forrest and that
1t would be done in the last painful way and without
have already stated and which he has taken in his
nnsl letter. QHow did Mr. Bryant become introduced!
". thought sr;usd seomos
bic with our obtaining divorce, and perhaps him
on the matter knowing him to be particular friend Of
to carry cut views note produced this was written
by me to Mr. Bryant ; had communicated our views
to him.
Mr. Van Buren, We now offer the note OF Mr. Bryant
in which he says Mrs Forrest sgrees to the terms OF the
negotiation proposed by MI Sedgwiek, her only stpuls-
ton being as to sec urng her allowance,
Mr.. oConor objected. If Mr.. Bryant can prove So
call him to the stand.
Mr. Van Buren, urged its admissibility.
Chief Justice IL CURED the date Of tie note.
Mir. ysn Buren-1he 9th February, 1850.
Mr. 0'Conor having looked at the note said he could
not consent to its admission he had other notes from
MIR Bryant which he would be obliged to read aud he
thought the better way would be to call Mr. Bryant to
the stand Mr. was to have the parties
separated quietly In Order that his family might bs
spared the annoyance Of being dragged before court
they Nov are.
The Chic. Justice ruled he had ye terdsy that there
must be proof Of the authorized agency Of Mr..
Bry ant before bs acts be put in evidence The let
ter therefore ruled out and Mr. Van Buren, took an
exception
Dir Van Buren called for the reading Of Mr. sedgwcks
CT the 18th February. 1850 TO Mr. Oonor put in
evicence yestrday and then proposed TO read Mr. Bry
MIR s.1c htrh i'm
to MIR 0Conor.
MIR o'Conor Objected and the Chief Justice said It
GENES precisely within the rule laid down IL Mr. Bry
ant wss an agent prove IT, There Is nothing 10 this
10 show that he was anything but the mutual friend
Of Nils spd hr. Forrest
witness coptinued--The interview did not take place.
the PARTIES dd not 10 my office; the petition OF
Mr. Forrsst PRODUCED the word criminal nterlinei Ia
was introduced BY me- It was done The same DAY Of
Q--Was that petition drawn up in accordance with
the negotiations made on the suhec Objected TO- and
ruled out.
Q.-what reply did Mr. Forrest make either 10 appro-
val or csspProva when told him the result Of your
int rview with MIR 0'Conor! Al think Mr.. Forrest
mole sati.h,d with the interview then vas he 20
far approved Gift as to iat'y what did though he was
not satisfied with ths direction wished TO give IL
SJbs Quept to that did you communicate with HIN Whist
had been done as TO a settlement! A-Ubdonbtedly
there was objection to proceeding Ia Pennyivs-
pia made by Mr. oConor at that tim nor dc zee It in
any 81 the corrrspon lerce.
Paper Dat, Jan lSIs already read and numbered 49,
produced again Witntss-I rcoi'eet reading this pa
very Ntli Mt FORREST fIvct~unS'
divorce in the STATE Of Pennss lvania QWho advised
him TO proceed there!
Mr. OCopoI objected Mr., Van Buren, said ne wished
TO show hst Mir sedgaict and himself advised Mr. For
rest e. proceed IN PepnsJ lysnia
MIR Conor said If be was as anxious to try parties
cut tf this Mr. Forrest be would admit the
testr, ~ but as he had Il, size 10 try the counsel
who gave tho advice he would object TO IL (lsughter)
IL was sso welt known trait counsel often receive mis-
statements and their advice on those misstatements
could not he admitted
MI Van Burtn said that his advice to Mr. Forrest
ives founded ON the facts they have turned out
The Chi Justice sad, IL st al material who
advised iiB it Is sufficient 70 prove That he proceeded
with aavice Of counsel.
Wiress-mr. Forrest always proceeded by advice Of
council In PtEns, lvapia and he~e
NJ. 0COpey-teu wrl pnasutsAA ne Suling VI w