The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-01-22
THE FORREST DIVORCE CASE,
Conclusion Of the Summing up on Part Of the
Defendant.
Superior court.
Before Chief Justice Oakley.
sA~NAaIuE n FORREST EDWIN YoRREsr.

rwFSry-sIrrH pay
CONCLUSION OF ha. VAN BUREN's SPEECH.
JAH. Il MIR. Van Bur.n resumed his review OF the
evidence this morning He said 1t desirable that
they should keep in their MINDS the discovery of the
one proved in December ls49 The parties they would
bear in mind remained from January 1s49 to
May 1870, and then to Dsotmoe, lsi9. But Mrs For.
xest ssd that the letter Ct December OF lS49 the
first intmation received by her tbs said Edw For
rest euspected her chastity That s months after
the discovery OF the CoDsueo letter, which he would
now read to them TO how that conveyed rrefrsg able
evidence 10 any superior minded man Of the guilt OF Mrs
animation that he suspected her in any manner
the question Of her purity. The eff iavit made
her attention wa, drawn 10 a solemn statemenu maize
previous to the separntiona statement repeling the
mputat ion Of guilt and therefore, necessarily MAJ
IN consequence Of that intma,oD beiog previously
yeyed by the person Who made the statement She
dertook to expsin the cir under which that
fdsyit OF the I'd Of December the because it
was matter Of comment and it was said that this
manufactured statement fraudulently ante lated
and portion Of ii inserted the time she sig ed
the statement Now, they would all see how far her
statement in that respect sustained by the evidence
In the case ana he referred to os o95 COL lie nton
ed the ios for the convenience " the counsel on the
other side Mr. Van Buren, ihep Mrs Forrest
fdzvt (aready published IN the proceedings OF 5ist
OF Decemher) the reference TO her conversation with
Dir Forrest respecting their separation in which
which, her sugge,tion Mr. Forrest drew up and she
signed. Her affidavit on this point concludes thu..-
as % ss
algusse only refers ard evty venial
niai Of ornGs oSnduc. am sorhrnsd in this belief by
with view to my preudes, twice since The
T saa seton and has on boh withheld
ing etthnt paper did not attrec nu attention from me,
S e ty ay event
hs m to in from
ever q Mr. Forrest 70 my action in October last is5o Mr.
ss sT rsSy as & T.
o Aka
sn % attentng my nnocence the contrary was my
Statements said .aay abo my having snssred on
his statementa a5ou. the seses IN shs ,sd
AFFIDAVIT 70 hsve taken place the occasion OF signing
He did 40 for another resson--tbe statement was
30 awful in its nature that he had hesitated to produce
it. ehe saidsnd he wished them to bear in mind while
be read that statementshc admitted that it was made
after difficulties had occurred between them and before
the separation and therefore made in March April or
May. The learned counsel then read portion of the
nfdayit Of Mrs Forrest nch hos before appeared in
cur colum ne and continued Now fora spge Instance
until December 1sie, did she have the slightest
intmaon that he suspected the question cf her purity;
then she said that IN the entb October her attention
drawn to the statement she had made. She
then started an explanation as to what had
been doue for his future satisfaction. He denied
breach of decorum, that her signature to
che document was tampered with Now, he would pro.
duce the paper and the jury would bear in mind as he
read it. that he regretted be Obliged repeat that
~as made in solemn manner, at her special request
iMr Van Buren, then read the declaration Of innocence
ings Of the cd January, and marked No. So Now they
would perceive that the suspicion that she had thrown
vhoiiy GEsustained rhe manner in which the paper
was sgnsd ehewed that because there still room.
Thus more euspicions We're thrown out in unusual
|: would be perceived that her sig nature,
distance from the writngso far from attempt
being mads to write above her signature there
interval Again. although Lawson sad 1t seemed to have
been written at the same time, was that inmate
rial, aft his statcren it made before the
separation, ard made long befo,e December lSl9
iVp1th tha N frnati
ever had Information that Mr. Forrest suspected
her purity Again in reference to that date there
no dayt was written prior to the timeit simply
January, lS49 Again she said that this awful state
ment, made BY her, was merely denial Of iufieity
when the very FIRST statement is solemn declaration
that che had been unisihul to the marriage bed
and 90 irterliEed over her signature IL one Of
snencement, which obviously must have been in the
original statement, commencing with solemn language.
Now all those pretences which had been made by her
explain this paper, were falsfed And how fearful
fhe weight when he recurred 10 the flity OF her orr
ginal ttatement that in December, 1910, she
had any intima.on Of suspcion Of her purity Had
1t not transprei Ia the face OF It. that eleven months
before that time she made that solemn statement Did
they not believe that it his satisfaction when he
had the Consislo letter in his Did they not
believe that it referred to past deinquences, and To-
sended to prevent separation! She had made state.
ment which. in his judgment no vrcuous woman would
have made. No virtuous woman would have ma DE- that
statement for any purpose, and least Of all to crafty
the fear OF future suspicion, and 70 overcome the
convictions Of the present IT, then, they locked
at the fucts as the evidence showed it to them and
counsel, and bottomed themselves on proof how would
the transaction appear In reference to tue case?
That he took her to house-that he gave
her edition Of Shakespeare without suspicion Of her
guilttha he made her allowance of $500 year, be-
cause he knew she was an innocent woman That state
ent to which he referred could only have been made in
consequence OF her conviction of her guilt. he now
called at ntiop to Of the other contradictions in
this statement because it weud be necssary advert
to them hereafter for she agreed to keep silence in re-
gard to the Of separation and Mr. Forrest bound
himseif to eimar silense He had never been heard
IN Opt na els III
know OF it he did not even speak Of it when be vent to
her residence in January 1919 snd said This is my
son which separated him fsom his wife When Lawson
pressed him night and day, be said ha made ansSer
tion and raid, Are Jou going To separate from your
wiie?n he replied, that is true Thep, said GresD
spray, tel Inc the reasons lie replied, No there
some things between msn and wife that arc sacred
and ought no. 20 be spoken off, He heard to
open his ps the subject until December 1910 That
wasso much evidence OF EN- agreement to 10 co. and he
followed that coirse Now Let them what she said
about that Mr. Var Buren, referred to page G2 in the
printed book, "a follows -
Iaever cStrested or requested Ne Forests sienoeia
lation any ct or conduct Of miro por cid o eyer agree
Idepy all bis nl,ogs.iOns in these rspsots 1t
ya hS o
comnensf serysnts, or to AVOID fny conselgeues nor
aud nyseif On sS,s Subject adod separation Of Mr.
s one ef them HAVING oYeresS .as on the eish
tcenth OF January 1895 and mmedih,ey Was
Stout wsek aftor that tirse That said between
ss'ss oss S Mr to
~bsd the esu OF our separation to be ker. aseos that
he did not wish Unknown that person lived ato- In
peachu his veracy; thai IL other rcIsons brsi
nss , al; SG os ss
dsEce. irsmarktd thst must 2ai'on IL TO sister,
and gh End IL almost necessary 20 atatc to somo osher
rier de- B added that he wished no Goc 10 know H. ana
spsisn q 5y s FOREST @ @ sc @ taas sSa ss
dncsd bo made the eqnct for silence aud prnsnme
considered Lavins acquosscC ior eusweIot pretty
much ss beftr
Bhe enrealed him 20 keep .cn her Efforts to take his
breakfast TO him take in The lights 70 taSe in any
thing for the purpose OF having interview With HIM
showed her anxiety. They would perceive that sue
denied any agreement to keep ellen In regsrd to the
cause OF separation. and oEtsd 20 ts nosoricty BIT
In letter which she " sr lawson, she said ia
the postscript, in HAY 49 No ~ "You yesterday sad
that Forrest hsd made Ole references 70 unhappy
separation; that Ia mater discuss With enY
one ana we mutually agreed MT 70 mc nton it, Was
that the agreement between them II 50. then ehe
stated an unqualified fa!sehooG Ia her ai layit. in
regard 10 the terms which they seoArated.
Mr.. Forrest bearing that there rum at in
raId 20 tic cansa OF M.Llntinn