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

under which that letter sent to which been
read to you Mr.. Forrest has made reply to that si
% 70 as us ali those mater. that GPe
.ny S:n portion ss.d Of was sa
| remains unanswered. Andrew Stevens cannot now
ne whs hs Tho ns. tS
matter! Mr. Sedgwiok was employed about that time.
The nextsteP in this affair is Mr. Fornsys commission
The date Of Mr. Forneys letter the 26h January,
1850 Mr.. Forney gives Mr.. Forests statements and
it argued that because there is certain degree of
conflict Mr. Forrest could net have approved OF every
word Of It. don't know that that is the right csnclu
sion. We have produced written statements Of Mr..
Mr. Forrest denies that this man, Jamioson, whom
he knows to be poor creature, was induced to
make admission in evidence against Mrs. Forrest,
and in the evidence to be adduced before the
State Legislaturefor he could hope 1t to stand
in q court OF justice, though it might pass
evidence before Legislature. lie ia fond OF fools
ard he made his suggestions to Mr. Forrest viii read
to you (Mr O'Conor then resd Mr Forneys letter,
Now next to the 25th January 1850 came part OF the
admission from mr. Forrest, relative 10 the half for
tune placed in the market as inducemeut to every
vaEabond IN the community TO forward to contr
butte his mite for the accomplishment of the deired OBJ
jet That, We have in black and white from less
niIer of Mr. Forrest-epd who swears to you that he
wrote that letter upon the authority Of Mr. Forrest,
sand dollars al bis comr and, and with his Phadsphia
nGs in abundance should have induced Catherine
geIsol is not 20 be wondered at ana which ready
TO he given to those who would be Instrumental
ieying kim from bis hateful ond-thougn it might not
b. literally true it st.ikes that the party would try
70 hesp back some part Of the seventy five thousand
dol and would rather hold them by wsy OF tezp
aton to parties to induce them to tor his
puTpose-yea even Ut ten per cent Of the anount II
would be enough to bring army of Ann Flowers to
dehour half the ladies of New York daughter
Wen now gentle men, the 2tth the 27th January
but two days after that III Forrest and his philadelphia
lawyers arrive In the city of New York aud lols-
legs at the Astor Hou,c; they so to The house of M
letters inviting conference at his hou.e, FOR
the purpose of showing me- such aidayits he might
think proper TO present. and to apprize OF
the course ne intended to pursue, and to btsning
the assent Of Mrs Forrest to this proceeding received
that letter on Monday morning. and answered it on
Monday evening. came to the meeting instructed by
MIS- Forrest to do everything make her
II Mr. Forrest want divorce he welcome to it but
me would not submit to be oish She required
TO take such would preserve her honor uu
tarnished. acted with caution IN the case knowing
that an application had been made In court of Justice
She gave notice OF violated agreement making an
impeachment of her honor Whatever ner lord wanted
he was welcome to, except her honor which she would
strenuous efforts were made in the to fasy the
affidavit Of Mrs Forrest to prove this state of things
for length Of time to allow divorce to be obtained from
her founded upon charges upon which to impeach her
sented and induced to change views in that re.
spect The attemptwas to show that for length time
with Mr. Bryant and another party to have the
adusted that things went along agreeaby Mrs For
rest and that shs was ready to submit but that unor
tunately ehe fell into the hands Of individual who
would not allow her to slide down the slough Of dstruc
ton that It was my improper interference, il
produced and Mr Bryant has been produced. The
learned sounse has several occasions endeavored to
argue that Mrs Forrest did not follow the advice Of her
early friends but led by the advice adopt
different course What had to do with Mrs Forest or
Mr. Forrest previously? Has proved that ever
spoke to either Of them 1t has not been proved-and
proved by somebody, would not have been true did
rest only client Will be saio that was so hardly
for business that was anxious for that poor
her lawsuit in Pennsy vana In order that might have
the advantage Of getting her business? There is no
ground for supposing anything Of that kind, but that
undertook the execution Of her orders, and would
have submitted to anything and everything but her
dishonor that she was willing to do so, and
what is the fact Has Mr. Bryant interfsred with the
matter previously Now whsn Mr. sedgvick came to
ns with the By whom the alter Sad
commenced had been broker in consequence Of its bein
necessary to make rome impeachment against the cha
racter Of Mrs Forrest. in order to obtain divorce
agreed that we .houd call in Mr.. Bryant His first in
reference appears TO have been the sixth of February
WI he addressed letter to 1t is very clear and
pointed (Nr o'Conor read the letter which has ap
TeaIed Mrs Forrest agreed to this letter having seen
the petition to Which it refers The learned counsel
then detailed the negotiations which had been
lied Oh, and the acts in connection with them. lie
referred to the statement which had been made Of his
(Mr OConor) having been seen pacing IN aud down
TSenty second street. in Barney McCabe the
witness, and ridicued theassertion lie derided the
evidence Of Anna Flowers aud the corrupt manner in
ii
copy Of letter written by Mr.. Forrest in reference
TO the Aser Place riot IN which he exuited the de-
structon cf he people aud asked what the lives of
a mob compared with tia bfe of superior man The
demon of massacre Could any individual be found on
this matter daring to advance single step in invoking
the shield OF Justice in favor of the victim Of his da-
boca maignity without exciting n desire or his part
that their blood might flow, and that their reputation
might be blasted, Re.erring TO Mr. Lawson be consi-
dered him to be who had played the very let.
ter the character Of MGcSy cophant TO his lord and
that he had dons his biddirg in all things |
Dppu fRil l9t IN with inu
purpose of deceivug the hearers is put in the
and clothed in the guilt Of alsehood there is not
living who could not coin words in such way ~ to
IerfeIt the truth, in the meaning Of them; and see
no escape for Mr. Lawson at alfor to put down the
rsanrg which he endcavored 10 convey to the court
have the very 5est MIR Forrest hav-
ing seen and approved OF the copy of that letter mme
diSey after 1t vaswrtten Why was this course skenl
Why, Lawson did IL merely for the purpose which he
made In his statement, and which statement ray
cannot be true in ons particular, 20 which desire
cell your att ntion but willing TO have the rest
taken for granted The part object to is where Mr.
Lawson states that Mrs Forrest period after
their separation had taken place, told Mr. Lawson that
she bad Obtained from MIR Forrest premise to k.sp
fecret the Of their separationthat is that she
hsd obtained This all care about in ths testimony OF
Mr. las That say s not So his statement is not at
all material except helps to support the mplication
that It was some crime the part OF Mrs Forrest which
this is mere repeating of Mrs Forests words and
these words might easily have been forgotten, mis-
taken ysred, without being very guilty. In that
former sdavit Of Mr. Lawsons there Is no such state
Msrt chat to be found We have always asserted and
ssert that the demand for secrecy the part
ofMr Forrest 1t is impossible that Mrs Forrest cocd
have said MI Lawson also tells you that Forrest
sad another thing. which she denestha she asked Sr.
Forrest whether he had any fault to Cad with her as
wife, aud that Mr. Forrest answered mo, UathaDe;
Would to God had, fer then should not feel badly
as do That We deny and the gentlemen Of the jury
are perfectly aware that we might admit H. without any
prejudice and therefore might well admit it if it
nue. but deny IL. His honor, the Judge put
question to Mr.. Lawson for which thank him, lin
respect what Mr. Forrest informed us-tha it the
same ersation In which Mrs. Forrest said this
thing about her and her husband that he could find
fsuIt in her and MIR Lawson answered that 1t
IN the conyersstjon when she told him that she
had requested Mr. Forrest 70 keep the cause OF their
separation secret Now gentlemen, IL was why what
did Mrs Forrest ten him &C that time She told him.
IN the fret place that there was fault her part
She told him. in the next place, that Mr. Forrest him
self admitted hie fault her part. And she told
him. In the third place. that the of their separation
kept secret at her request Now, suppose 1t were
all true would the implication arise that she sckDow
lodged to Lawson that The OF the separation was