New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-01-21
IL TESTIMONY THEN CLOSED.
SUMMING Up.

Nh Van Buren, then commenced 10 sum up on
behalf of Mr.. Forrest. lie congratulated the jury
in the termination of the testimony-much of it may
have appeared irrelevant, but the parties were sem
sative as to their standing before the public.
The parties were married IN 1887 nyeI together
u or 10 years happily they agreed 10 separate IN
lsis did so in Aprl, 1879. There IS no c)ntradic-
ion Of this nor there that his conduct toward her
Throughout was Of The most kind aud aitectlontle
character He loved her. ami thus situated, he put
her away, ard she consented to The separation. lie
had no difficulty whatever with any person. lie put
her away 10 the hOuse OF Mr.. God ain, where she
desired to go. lie was silent for months aitef"ari,
and allowed her s 500 year And this was argued
against hiIn that he had faith Of hts charges
lie still pay her 81 500 year, aad yet he believed
and still believes, she had been unfaithful to him
Withou; any intention or his part for divorce he
removed 10 Philadelphia. lie found subsequently
that it had been charged the separation clused
by fault on his part. lie came here ana inquired
OF her II She had placed such reports IN motion, and
be got evidence that she had done 50. II became
necessary, and so understood by them, That there
must be q divorce ard negO'i alton commenced De-
tween them. Mr.. SejCeW!ck was applied 20, and
Mr.. O'Conor Enay, Oh The part Of ilrS Forrest, de-
claTed nothing could be done inconsistent with the
idea OF her innocence. Dir Bryant good nan, aud
mutual frierc OF the par les was applied 70. aud me
COnsueiO letter. auO other evidence placed "a ms
hands. Mrs Forrest had agreed ~ divorce. In
letter Of Ar Byalrs Of FeO ne says he has ead
tie memorial aad the charges are 10 De great nils-
creiions Of behayior-aoes ROY necessarily Imply
guilt He said he had advised MTs. FoTesr to let Mr.
Forrest tai 2 divorce rom The Pennsvl7ania Leg
lSuIe ard he has reason 70 DSlSVe sac is READY 10
follow The advice
Neither Mrs Underwood nor Garvin state any
specific charge but great lAdscretion strengthening
tie other testimony
On Oh February, Mr. Bryant again wrote 20 ", IN
which he sand he had had another interview with
Mrs Forrest, and she asSented % Mr. Forrest taking
adivo!ce provided the allowance Is properly secured
20 her after the divorce
he recoll ec'ed in giving his testimony, that some
other difficulty had ARISEN besides ihe allowance :
but he cannot recoilect that Mrs. Forrest SAID any
4 meeting was appointed for 18Th Feb, but at
which neither Mrs Forrest nor Mr.. 0COnor came,
and af.erward a note was sent oy Mr.. O'C. to MI
Stdewick that 10 application would be submitted to
which, In any degree, lMpugned the entire lnhO-
thus The negotiation failed, but It mad previously
been agretd 10. Mr.. Forrest then returned 10 the
home OF his bnth and his childhood, aud presented
before the Legislature OF Pennsylvania, q had orig
inally been proposed This failed. and a la \ was
passed shortsnIg the term to residence OF year 70
apply for divorce 10 the Courts
On that application before the Legislature Com
mission was sent here to take testimony, AMI the
efftayits OF Mrs Underwood, which have been read,
were taken on that occasion. MIS- Forrest had no.
House in this City, bu. she refused 10 attend.
Nh Forrest then commenced SUIT for divorce IN
tie Court il PeAnsy vania anl on his returning 10
ms City the whole artillery Of the Law was let loose
yond seas lie eXe8t Injunction, and SUIT for Inn
lied divorce as 10 latter It was abandoned, ana me
costs paid and al the rest OF the oppressive SUITS
against him set aside by the Courts me Only one re-
naming being injunction 70 the suit IN Phlla1el-
mia " hich the nudge retained but Is IN supreme
Court lot yet argued. Then came this case, the
third entered by Ms. +. against Nj. r. We plI
in an answer
It's for you 20 try the Issues. l shall say nothing
ss 10 amony. The irs. issue is, TO whether adl!-
terry Was committed by defendant, IN tbs state or
elsewhere ard IS 20 residence, the ssdLI.e says,
wherever may be the residence OF the huso nd IAe
VIE has right to lie bill in this STATE wherever
she is. whether defendant was resident oil thls
State at the time Of the commencement OF t1e ac.Oh'
IL the first place, did Cefeltani reside 5sh sept,
1880 when this suit was commenced, IN mis- S.ste.
1t was an issue which we regari Of some moment
If he was resident Of Pelsy'va1la
Next! hasbe committed the adultery charged aH1
81, has Mrs. T. committed the adultery cnalgeu
a. sinss her I'll, :. o.ha,
Questions arise, may say few words az 10 tlem,
but these are the three material questions.
IwoulC ask the jury 10 dlvest themselFes Oh pfey-
dec The Plaintiff q woman. and there Is preu-
disc on behalf Of courts and Iuries IN favor OF Ine
centler sex, tha. nearly depTlves de'ehuaht Oh
btaIiIg, If not Of justice II is proper 20 ex1ehd
sympathy 70 the weaker sex, but II the testimony
Leaves 10 doubt, ask you, that because the con-
test is betw cen man and 4 woman, Il shall noI ue'
prive Us Of justice.
TIE plaintiff has bad means ard influence 10 bring
I'D vltlf sses and obtain the best counsel S,e ma
also had the aid OF influential men connectsd HI.I
the press places of puolic amusement and leaoers
OF convey ance, so thai witnesses couIh PC
M and where falsehood was required, IL Is 10 De
feared i could be obtained. -..
will esk the Jury, il they commence the ln7esIl-
eaticn ulrejudiccd, and Lot warped by represeaia-
tons in newspapers Otherwise as TO acts OF un'
Kindness II otherwIse.
TIE letters 10 her show Lis heart. They are no!
statements made % The public. nor intended u DC
brought 10 the world II there Is time |" hea IA an
speaks Just what he feels, it 10 when he sets 90
and writes familiar letter TO his wife Ihess ie'