The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-01-24

.
Be juds BY the company he keeps And It Is so slight
SO evasesosn in itself that 1t Is impossible attach
any importance to as Mr. Burr states he
never repeated to the substance Of this con-
versation This Is au the evidence that che had
attempted to impsach the character Of Mr. Forrest In
menced these had he become satisfied that
to protect his reputation 1t necessary to obtain
divorce and to set forth the grounds which he OBJ
tanned IT. And So why did he otter TO bind himself to
keep the proceedings prvate 1t Is the testimony Of Mr.
Bryant that he did so-it is the testimony of Mr. Sedg
wick, his own counsel that they offered solemny to
pledge themselves that he would give any publicity
to the charges to the testimony this application
and would prevent any publicity being given by any
other now or hereafter. This his solemn promise
Now, this rather odd way of vindicating man
character to make interest with judicial committee by
the force OK his personal On further reference
to the evi upon this point Mr 0Conor remarked
upon the proposition TO pass the bill through the Penn
sivania Legislature, without tho ohsrVes being made
her guilt when Mr. Forrest to agsiust
her. AT the time of the interview hich took place be-
tween Mr.. Sedgwok and himself (mr. O'ConorI, there
WAS existing that Ocnsuelo letter Now, TO that Con
sueo letter he had shown the jury that il not the
cause of the separation. AS 70 that letter that
poetry, 1t not shown that 1t ever In her pos
session, except by her own admission In the next
place, 1t IS addressed to Q sort Of divinity, aad
IN the rext place, ii has no individuality; 1t has
name no sgnatoro-no adopted signature by which it
could be known as the homage Of particular indivi.
dual. II might be copied from book, ami in sll
probability il was-for those gentlemen who profess to
write extemporaneousy generally borrow their ideas,
and II would require very extensive reading to be able
to detect tbs plagisiEB And what is the character
oI Sonsuee' In Mrs Forests affidavit in the print
ed book, page s06, she says
Consuelo the heroine Of q modern French novel. is
dcsrss Of aaisii,y chastity ana pariy shs, The MIND
could coneeye or LANGUAGE portray The vorl signifies
could et for The adoption Of that addres in said letter.
tSe person addressed and tha heroine '
But they had been told, by way Of taking OF the
male designation in her writings He however, found
in Hosrus journal, vol l. page l2s, the following
rrssed ~r,ers he Bsac anin sue for sho
never makos vice Rautitul-neser rewards crime
rounded with the glory sr, the Sossedness we'll
ten ssS g opy sf m q
IN which, in order to convey the highest conception
that he could conceive Of his most excellent father be
son If they rlessed-wrote this rhoiomont which
Tho counsel read and he said would read 1t we'll and
he could read nothing else WE'LL he ought to be able to
read that to perfection. (Laughter.) Well Mrs For
rest did rot burn that letter, and Us romantic
terms she IL to be denounced as an bass
woman. If Jameson had criminal intimacy With MYs,
Forrest would he not have written letters of different
description = some plain angua 90 containing matters
Of fact, and naming time and place of meeting
A woman who had betrayed her husband would not
certainly he addressed in this strong and warm language
nun loses all respect for woman after her dis
homer and it is not when she is sunk, such Language
that Is addressed to her If Mrs Forrest that guilty
woman, would she have placed that letter in drawer
which 1t was shown could be easily opened! The fair
construction is, that this having entertained high
admiration for Mrs Forests character every who
comes within the sphere of her acquaintance entertans
for her-even Mr. James Lawson tells them be admired
and respected herthat man (Jamieson) sat down per.
haps in drunken fit and either wrote this rhodomon-
tsde or copied 1t from book The greater part of it sp
pears to be the most monstrous nonsense AS to the
meant the rhyme which is much less poetic
that in speaking Of Mrs Forrest the writer might have
spoken Of her charms, and not confined them to one
lie says:--
aOf calling back with fsncys charm
Those halcyop hours when in my
Clasped Consuelon
This he (br OConor) supposed was poeti license and
rhyme II with charm daughter Now, he might
have used the word enjoyment but then he should have
not dofancet happiness is bliss--and then Of course
what word is there TO rhyme with 1t but kiss" aagh
poetry Of the letter. he continued to cay that it
vain to doscant at length this sort OF poetical stuff
which gentlemen please indulge In. 1t was speaking
" Of , lady rather than "to' her. Mrs Forrest is a
lady whose very looks and presence-he said it with
at once ths respectful distance Of
any man, be he ever great libertinc, and towards
whom, during twelve long years OF intimacy, even Ed
win Forrest himself with all the righls and privileges of
husband had never dared (when he did speak) to ad
eeferential and respectful character. They knew
thing OF his speaking except by his letters and they
I'll speak Of her as the "Consueo of his life, which
life could be Of very little value when he bapished Con-
fueo from his side But how is II to be supposed that
Mrs Forrest should have received that letter and gone
into pucker like Dame Underwood, and put it out OF
sister Agar 1t fell into the hands Of her husband
il brought before the Pennsylvania Legislature and
pronounced utterly exclusive az to the guilt Of
Mrs Forrest; it apparent tnsss Mr.. Forreet was
aware that that letter could be Of little avail and he
therefore endeavored to get out Of Jameson when
drunk, through the agency of John W. Forney, bra
vado admission of his intimacy with Mrs. Forrestthe
evidence required to be fulfilled by an admission
iorted from Jameson in hour ofintoxicaton Again,
they find that Mr. Forrest; by the advice Of his coun
OF Garvin and Mrs. Underwood took So
emn oath that without the evidence OF Anna Flowers
ne could not safely go to trial Mr. Forrest In his a
,ayit of 2lst May 1851, rays :
lie has fully and fairly this to Burcn
bat he has sood and subsans defence in ssG cause on
ie me,ts as he y assed BY his said counsel aad ysrg
ia who not rcsdent Of this ssste but resides n the city
Sa us me Ria a
y sns Sy ,S.sd to az sala SSaa.l what hS
ty his said counsel and verify believes that's
end that without the bsneh teotimony depo
es cannot safely proceed 70 The trial Of shs .use
noDy he swears he Cannot go to trial without the evil
5ence Of Anna Flowers aud it would be for the jury to
my what additional proof be has got by the testimony
ghole Of Dir Forests conduct from January 1919 to
NE close OF that year was most conclusive that he
,ould have considered the Cons0elo letter bot be r
)C) did piece of rbodomondete, which his lady had
but certainly not imprudeuty, retained
Mr. oConor then referred TO Mrs FORESTS dec,raton
oi innocence which had been written by r Forrest,
md signed by her and was proceeding to state what
was raid by Mr. Forrest in hi. affidavit respecting IT.
when
Mr. Van Bureu objected ss Mr.. Forests affidavit
nor perm itted 10 he read in evidence.
Tie Chief Justice said that the affidavit of Mr. Porres
ned not been read. and certainly could not be
n.r;ed II could only bs referred TO far as it
,il t-aoed In Mrs Forrest's affidavit
~ NCouor said he only intended to refer to IL 20 far
4 "a been noticed in Mrs. FORESTS answer Mr.
rstt changes Nrs Forrest with signing the decara
c1 N seofhng ard contemptuons manner. MIR. For
sst cannot saythrre is ground for sayiug--that
st defamation changed the character of the Copsueo
etter Ii lie believed htr guilty why did he separate
Iom her? Why. on account OF ber guilt Mr.
J'Conor again read the declaration, which has been
already published in the proceedings Of the Sd January
md also that part OF Mrs Forests affidavit in which
he said che suppofed il had been dated by Mr.
Forrest They would recolect that this document
suddenly started hershe had forgotten its precise
language and she called upon under oath to reply
TO 1t and che her recollection that II was only
in reference to charges Of very vensl nature and
Jet how perfectly true her affidavit seems 10 be Mr.
DiConor here pointed out to the jury the manner in
v bch the document was written, and said that il
differently from Mr. Forests usual mode
The latter portion of II is in these werds -
All this in tho presence Of Almighty God swear and
be not true may roae comfort and happinoss forsahe