The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-01-25

legged that the defendant didn't make any denial
The Chief Justice said not necessary for counsel
| to make any observation on that.
| Mr. Van buren, Another point H. that Mr. O,Conor
states that Mr. Forests visits to Mrs Ingersos house
stated and he mentioned Of the jurors may
not have paid attention to that fact In those
took 70 th. Mr. "as vn9 th.re far
years and half, there testimony approaching IT,
He, (Mr. Van Burep) before commencing his sumailnX
up had asked the cCunse to cite authority that poog
alone to suspicious houfe evidence to authorize the
conviction OF the party Of adultery No authority hai
been given him at the outset but he Afterwards
ferred to I'd Hazards Cousistory Reports Ecllc.
astical Rev (keads t) What he (alr. Van Buren,
said was that there whore indisiiut
tborise copv ction. The counne says that M. tnr
rest sn'peoted bis wife from May as to Janu'Sy ~
bad said that 1t was two weeks after Mr Borrrs.
found her in that position with Jameson in orcinuat
that the letter banded to her by him Whstevar II
was that occurred that Disconnected hr Forrest IA ia
cnnt Il WA two eeks alter chat that The letter vaa
The cbisf Justice sekd Mr Van Burea to col at 70
the evidence, Tor hs impression that it other
Mr. Van Buren, herc read the deposi,ions Of Mr. g. 8.
Smith
Mr. oConor raid It was admitted by syrs Forrest In
her affidavit that the letter received by he: before
she went 10 PisbuTg, but that ehe thea took notcs
of il.
Mr. Van Buren, continued to refer to the deposition, OF
Mr smith, and sad The argument put into my mouth
H. that Mr. Forrest suspected hie wife from tnat time till
be fonrd the letter That In not so would ak the
Court TO instruct the jury how Tar they regard
thte paris of Mrs Forrests aids,t which have not
r.ad g1eat deal hos been spd IS to The character Of
Opsueio and Mr. Stmcy has hten cited it u aug.
gtsted thst this letter OF might be extract
from booh There - no evidence to that er.
feet. Again: Anna Flowers hss not kaid that
rhe paid all her expense here she said ehc
the cesre Of hr husband ard that Mr. Forrest paid her
eIpnses Size has not eaid that she afraid sleep
alone AZ to MIA Underwood tae counsel states that
her affidavit conveyed the idea tirs Forrest md
eloped reference TO will shcs that Mr. Forrest had
broke up houte before and there is no idea conveyed
that Mrs. Forrest had coped One word to Barney
McCate The counsel Gays that undertook TO prove
that turred RsrneJ Mocahe out OF Office, whist he
(Mr O'Goro received him in his ana that when did
tst undertook 60 play Mstanoia without the drsss.
have nos made any ohsefvnton towards sir O,ronor
ot offensive chaIac snd for ths hat sufficient
r,sson d. with agoCd 1olec ION from my losg lbit
OF pubic rpeahine ca saiey rn chat have not m de
spe word 81 offensive obseryr ton towards him IL
thtF'cie entirely uJjutt and uutaiE Tor Mr. OGonor to
diaw a,y lafallel betNeen him sad myself WITH re-
gard To Dir Willis the fact that there present
~he ttood IN IN intimate posihon 70 aim, is sufficient
r.asoE why old nor pveas HIN closely
M oCoacr eaid that Of this could surely be
cbtioT"c ss CORRECTION Tine counsel saYs that Anns
tw.rs admits thst Mr. Forrest paid her expenses No
1tuht she cid aomit 1t bot my argument is thst sh.
pfe'sted 10 saying that she bad expectation Of
Itwe'o.
AJuicr ~ MeggsD rro,ao) said he understood
Mrs IDgtf-o ssy that .-her Gr Fo:rsst in town
be Waited her once oI twice wees an il /. a. in
the pint, d i.pt,t
ar oCo, did rot pay par cular sttention to that
i.ithf tie evidence, bu hs til usnt she
:, t~iur r,ith and se that sufficient him lie
old ,G, k ior any mcte.
twice week, when in town and HAT tn, vhits would
average titrfetfer, orcc 'north
THE cHAEGg OF CHEF JUsTicE OAKLEY.
Chief Jufuce Oakley then said-GeDtsmsa of the
Jury It wiii,o take me long submit t. to you
~ doty il rerec to it lies very plainly before b.
a. proceeding 10 t however hna il proper notice
circumstances which have ocorcred tas ,asr
particularly o's in respsot toi ne Cuttec,uae gives
cpptrup:ty expinipi og folly what uies and
tu be tie rtttIss duties II thr Uour, ard Jury with
retre.t 10 nr tisl OF oi divorcs at the noucu
aodrs,s ccupsel for the dfenda at made se
lI.H Np EtF hr
sbf impatng to ihe cnu.t unfrncly state OF feet.
y OK IN o,her words terrg OF hostility If ths
ftite ~ this csse &c, quite fEti Get that the
sci did not iiend the words he did use in that
sense hecauss l. would he very gross In prop.isy, and
mukt have been known by the counsel b.y the
Irgnin'se line OF bis duty understard inst the re-
mark wns pteEcld to intimate belief his part that
tne couft hsu IN unarorb!e impresHon with respect
10 the case CT his client aud that the remark
made for the purpose Of instructing the Jury Of
ther duty to guard agair.. the Influences Of any such
unisvtrsole impression, Il " was laid before them.
G.ntleuer counsel in the progress OF trial and ia
a case which he thinks cells for t. has undoubtedly
riAht 70 eny to The jury, IN paiuer terms than the
eel ia Ills has rsed that the Court hrs al. i'm
pretstn against of the parties that IL Is the
duty Ct te jury to disregard thi, impression, and to
i.y en- their own convictions ard views Of the test
moty CT the case 1t is impossible, gentlemen, for
Judge, in proceeding the tfis Of sch case it
il Eponble for jury and impossible for bystander
" h'sr the Evidence IN tne case without forming an
opinion upon It, OF necessity IL must be 20; and pre-
sume no udge ever tiled without haviog ct the
cioe of l. decide impression bearing of the
whence IA In the course Of any remark. from the
judge sppsar that saeh impression dots exist II is the
dutJ and ptiiect tight cf the jury 10 think that his
opinions and directions seem TO BE- Giurnccd ia
degree by this impression of thu Court; but
csn say with great confidence that have sub.
miteda case to jury involving any matter interest
without city aprTielng them this fact
say to Jou gentlemen 10 the explicit that
whatever orn views may be in respect The effect Of
evidence On the side the other yen yourselves
are t. determine what the effect ought be according
your own conviction of ths fair operation OF the testimony
before Jtu, oscaue the vercis you render is =
bot ,euIf sns "a are reirS ble for it II s very diff
hcut 20 CAL the attention of the jary to testimony IN
case without indicating " an nprcsscn exists 70 the
t.aiipg o the esidencs, mt that u preston s would
er impossible e 90 20 hut tay 70 yeu, gentlemen and
wish 90 be understood distinctly you not 70 regard
ehy fttitbee nay draw OF The evidence or any inte
renee you mo- draw of my opinions In this case in
nuehcrG ~ tLe fhghiest tserce ytur own jui sDent
core iequerty occurs IN which II bect mes drt,
ue faiS 81 the court 60 LAP before the jury eTte,o
sH ne evidence N The Geus. II justics requires IL
re opshy 70 90 -. IL the Court thinks u pro-
PEI NJ Dss Always right % d. IL. He has al