The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-01-22

owAro and miss cinclar and part OF the arrangement
was that the letters written by Miss Sincair to Anna
Dempsey should be given up, and Mr. Raymond went to
the steamboat when she going to New Oreaus aud
got portion Of them from her Mr. Raymond thought
1t would be disadvantage to MISS Sinclair il they
not given up. II in those letters Miss Sinclair had
sdmonished Anna Of her crime II she, as would have
become choriser OF the church. bad called her to
repent In sackcloth and ashes - Ii there letters con-
tanned volumes of admonion telling her ths disgrace
tbe had brought upon her am telling her the disgrace
she bad brought upon the house where the sbauchng
bad taken place and telling her never to transgress in
this way again the letters contained all this why did
RAYMOND make the bargain to get the letters back Why
did Mr. voorhes follow her to New Orleans and take the
balance OF the letters from her. II Is extraordinary and
leoks towards theory to which 'hsl presently refer
Appas child subsequently sent to her to New Or
leans and fifteen dollars worth Of clothing given for
It for that purpo'e Who paid 1T Parks Goodwin FOR
Copt Howard and thus this child fitted for the
second time by Capt Howard. through the agency OF
paike Godwin They afterwards took the child from
New Orleans brought it to New York. and it remained
here Till ast July when they tell that it died Now
! would ask the explanation Of all this. is 1t that
Ba got the child that's rrepostcrous Is 1t that
Capt Howard got the child that's pre- potsroui Mrs
Foreft as viItuous woman would have said to Capt
Howard you have disgraced my house and enter
1t sgain.N But what IT. the other hand Anna held
within her breast the knowledge CT transaction which
was TO disgrace Mrs. Forrest, This key TO the
awicl fearful overwhelming efforts to blast the te.-
down to her remotes childhood has been examined into
Mrs Forrest and Capt Howard had had nine months
notice o. this testimony II it false Capt Howard
ehoud have raid to her don't dare go on the stand
If yon do and commit wiiful and corrupt perjury
sgains. Mrs Forreet and myself will prosecute you,
will send you to the State prison Why the only wit
pese ho could contradict Anna Dempsey to the
Sandwich islands. lie don't dare to come into the
city. What are you to infer from this but that
the strongest inferences Of the Law are against
tjm But sgain, where is Mre Voorhes, who
MIRA Forrest states stood by her all through Why does
now without apyispparen object except to 60
10 Italy With the preeent facilities for crossing hs
Atlantic che could have been brought hore twice while
this nal has been going Where is VOORHEES,, VINO
tcek the letters from Anna Dempsey? Where is Parke
gxutf
Thus we have found her paramouys her sister
as he admits all absent. Where are they And why
for the Whites the Curzons Why Doty put upon the
ftapd? Why the prostitutes put upon the stand! Why
ell these witnesses. with this immense outlay OF
money, while those who really knew about the
case have kept away Tell me why it is that
simple woman, rs if by magic, drives them
all saay-Howard to the Sandwich Island,-aod-
via to Enrope-Voorhes to Europe Because she
holds within her truth which destroy the whole
ofthem and they don't dare to confront her. have
atsmtnt b. it the impress Of truth and she
here to testify when those should have
by her have left her She Is alone her father is alb
rent; the father of her natural child becomes
Datural thoee who paid her for the support Of her
chi!t--all abandon her; but trust that when the
counsel comes to sum up on the other side, he will
not forget that she is tho Flowers" of his Forrest
srd not o. mine. Qaughter) Mr. Van Barren in fur
ther suson TO this Witness remarked that she the
wife OF respectable man holding respectable situa-
tion and with courage about her which apprc aches
the sublime, she came here, with her husbands
character,
bat. in Justice to the defendant to detail those
fscts with which she bad become aoq tainted
pass now to the consideration of the only remaining
charge to which think it necessary cali your atten
ion, ard have to render my Acknowledgements for the
kindness with which you have attended to my remarks
In submitting the whole matter to you, know that
have been thus far as you mut have been,
necessarily tedious in detailing the long and protracted
examination Of testimony appreciate the fact that
business but Fave been confined to this court house for
days end weeks, and can only promise that what
have to add will not occupy much more OF your time
The Charge which, In my judgment is the most serious
against Mrs Forrest is that in respect to which the
testimony with single exception is entirely uncon-
tadoted and that OF her adultery with Mr. JAMESON
and that rests in the first place the testimony Of Mr.
Smith ana to the in which he describes the cir
cumstancss under which the parties were, when Mr..
Forrest came suddenly into the room and this is in
striking contrast with the evidence Of Mrs Forrest
may be ted more to call attention to her
by the testimony Mr. Smith in respect to this matter
Mr. Van BuIen here read extracts from the affidavit Of
Mis- Forrest in respect to her intimacy with Mr. jamie
son. commencing at folio $50 and contrated her state
me Rts with LLose Of Mr. Smith the suhject the
substances of MIR. Smiths evidence received through
commission; published on 23d December Mr.. Van
Euren ctptnued--ths is the testimony then distinct
enough to contradict Mrs Forrest in respect to the ct
cIcu stances Of Mr. FORESTS discovery OF their
position On this occsrjon Now call to recollection
the testimony introduced the suggestions made when
We proposed to show the letter from Mr.. Jameson to
Mis-. FoIrest written about that time. You will recol
ec tie violent struggle which made to keep that
letter cut Of tits You will recollect that at
tempt was resisted at every step of the proceedings and
for weeks endeavorrg introduce that letter in
evidence and were continually met by suggestions
the ether sidethat whether mrs. had received the
letter from MIR Jamieson-whether she had received
letter at all likely referring to the Consuelo letter
there was no evidence-that there Identification
Of the precise letter offered in evidenceon the contrary
spracy set feet between Mr. Forrest and Jameson for
the purpose Of inducing tie latter to write another letter
differing f the original one given to MrF by him, and
which might her of guilt whereas the
was met with ftatements, and evidence, and circum
stances which had come to their knowledge authorizing
the conclusion that Mr. Forre had entered into
sprscy TO procute admissions from Jameson OF the
guilt Of his wife, which were ot contained in the orsi-
nal publications. and it in this connection and bear
irg upon this subject that the testimony of Mr. Forney
was introduced. 1t Is proper that in tins connection
shod cal your attention to that letter OF Mr. jamie
cons for two purposes. the fcst place you will see
hi sr this letter may be supposed to be suho by
MIS- Forrest and then how far it bears upon the ques
toa which you have TO try The only interrog sicns
this subject Of any materially is with respect to the
letter written by Mr. Forney to Mr.. George Roberts of
the Boston THtS. Counsel read this letter-pub,ished
in the progress Of the commenting it, to show
that, Though Mr.. Forrest cognizant OF it's being
written, ard communicated fa,ts therein mentioned,
yet from other Inconsistent details it evident he
had not seen 1t written Whatever may be said in re-
gard to the prudence of this letter acquainted
with Mr. Forney would hesitate to believe thc precise
object which he desired to attain and the TO which
he ustes he bad no earthly doubt he says in respect
to the guilt OF Mrs Forrest and he had doubt that
Ismieson would not hesitate to make q declaration
states that 90 far from entering on any dishonest
ornproper object of his twn notion his object was sn
honorable one and he supposed that he was attanin
and accomplishing it by honorable aud no we've
unve or wise this OF obtaining proof OF Mrs rs
guilt may have been there is particle OF authority t.
prove there will not be suggestion the other side
rot an argument to show that single thing was eve
done in compance with this suggestion by Mr. Roberts
except to send copy Of the letter, procure 1t to
sent directly to Mrs Forrest and to her counsel thinking
be woul show to them that in tbe frat place there wa
a dshonvrable proposition made to him, and that it
matter Of grest glory to him to have such dshoDor
able proyo.sl made to him, and In the next place to
rhow how honorable it was 10 him to betrsy the con-
fdeuoe reposed in him How be expected to appear TO
the most advantage by his participation in the msttr
I'm at loss to conceive. Mr. Forney treetiDg it as
honorable purpose wrote to Mr. Roberts who treated
1t os dishonofahe But it is sufficient to sag that it
neither procured any admission from Jameson was
any attempt made to procure such from him but long
before this letter which has been the subject of
mert In this case, in Mrs. Forests possession.
Wih there remarks proceed 70 call your attention to
"a ut ecr the gepuineness OF which has been dis
pEted The fact that it delivered to Mrs Forrest
before The time Of her engagement of Jameson to make
Usitthat it was delivered to frs Forrest before Mr.
rretUrp TO Observation-Disclosures to her while he was
on his way to Pttsburg where he remained for two
three weeks ane the iculty by Mr. Smith,