The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-02-24
The Alleged Perjury In sne FOaNss DvO1ee

TIE Alleged Perjury . n tho Forrsse divorce
coUpT of GENERAL SESSIONS.
Before the Recorder and AID. Wesley Smith and Bard
EIGHTH DAY-rm OFFENCE.
FywuARr 2s-Mr. Owens the juror who absent
IN account sickness yesterday in attendance
this morning and all the others having duly answered to
their names the defence proceeded with, without
any opening by counsel Mr. Whiting called and examined
William H Phelps sworn-was a member of the firm
of Panton Phelps Fry goods merchants IN Cortnndt
street knew Mr. Forrest BY sight but had no personal
acquaintance with him; knew Miss Clifton too
the North river objected TO by the Attorney General
on of its generality the same objection that was
made to other questions, viz That it was not confined
10 the time specified in Doty's evidence)
The Court sustained the objection. Exception taken
The following questions were then put and similarly
Did YOU see Miss Clifton and Mr. Forrest board
steamboat together, at the city o. New YORK BENG
night boat which boat left New York and went to Albany
the seine pighty
Did you see at any time, Miss Clifton and Mr Forrest
walking on the romenade deck Of steamboat,
being night boat while on the passage from New lorA
to Albany =,
Witness continued-Had no knowledge Of Mr. poty had
been frequently up and down the North river had
been subponaed, and came to court without any pre-
yous owedge that he 10 be Witness was not pre-
sent when Susan Allen, or "Blazes, as she Was cale'
Phillip Damn Jr sworn-Resided in Albany had resi-
ded there seventeen kept the City Hal Coee HOUSE
there had seen Mr. Forrest and Miss Clifton ID seeh h
theatre at bsnT sy on the Did voa zee them nat
see tine together while of the stage in the city OF Al
banyY Objected to: ruled and exception taken.) q.
Did you them in the together, while at Al
banyS (Ihe same) Q. As before, substituting the word
bedroom. Che same
O BY Mr.. chatfeld-what year it that you
them at Albany Objected to cross-examinaton
defendants not allowed to put the main question:
Mr. Chatfeld claimed it as cross. examination.
Objection overruled and exception taken. A. Idontt
recoiect O. To the best of your recollection was it in
ls4G Objected to- objection oyerrued, and exception
taken A. can't say. q Can you say it was not in
IL A,
is 1874 left the Eagle Tavern In April 1s43, and it
was before that them
lie Grand B. Cannon called and examined by Mr.. Whit
ing-Resided at Troy knew Mr.. Doty; had known him
three knew him as an officer of steamboat for
merly in the employ of tie company with which witness
connected his general character far he knew
was good
ossexamined-By general character he understood
common reputation recolieced hearing his character
canvassed at the time he gave his testimony q Have
you heard him called lying man, or gassy man
Qaughter) Objected to.
Mr.. Ciark-That is unmeaning and is casting reproach
improperly 1t it cacusted to defame, and not elicit
@ Have you not heard him spoken of ad-
dicted to telling large stotiesy AmendeG-A man who
could exnggerate or magnify in telling past
(Objected to- objection oyerruled and exception taken
A. 1have once. Q. Whom have you heard so speak Of
hms A. remember the fact, but don't remember the
persons Witness had heard Captain Upper speak of
him several times, when he to the Office. The Co.
umba was boat of their line did not know him to
be steward on board her he steward of the Troy
Re administration they said he exaggerated, it was
after he from sea- and in relation to some occur
renee there-the perils of the ocean daughter
Rudolph F. NJ Lexow reporter recalled and examined
by Mr. Cark-When Doty examined the Forrest
divorce trial, he said, to the of the boat &c
:. l think it was Captain Macy" Witness sure of
that Was also present when Dr. Quackenboss
amined the same occasion. O. What did he
Clifton f''''0D'O'' '''''
Mr. Chated objected the ground that it was collate-
Mr. Clark argued that it not collateral but part of
the material testimony and the direct mode of i'm peach
ing witness DR. Quackenboss had made two different
statements and on the sta nd here had denied it,
Mr.. Chatfeld said he did not think he had denied It,
The Recorder had not his minutes of that day with
Defendants counsel referred to their minutes and
stated they had entered and appealed his
recollection He also referred the report in the New
YORK HERALD, which he read and stated that coin
cided word for word with his notes.
The Court sustained the objection on the ground that
ii was collateral Exception taken.
O. What did DR. Quackenboss testify that trial rela
tive TO the duration of the illness of Miss Clifton in 1914
and bis daily visits to her? A. He said she was i'll from
time in April Il think ii 26th) to some time
in September and he called upon her every day To the
best OF recollection the doctors te stimony was
given unqualifedly because he named particular dates
the 10Th April and the 10th Sepember-n fact he recol
leced it.
@ Did he refer to any circumstance in proof of his
M shes ms . aha that he paid her daily pro-
fessioua visits during that period?
Objected to- the ground that the evidence far
st extends beyond the months of June and July,
costera and therefore conclusive against the defendant
very heightened argument followed this point and
Mr. Clark urged powerfully on the the Court that ii
Inconsistent in the Attorney General to from
Albany 10 prosecute Doty for mistake in date partly
upon the evidence OF Dr. Quackenboss while in the case
othe msatement by the other he contended that time
and place. and concommtant circumstances mma-
teria and collateral Both positions he thought could not
be maintained by the gentleman.
Mr. Whiting followed he side.
Mr. Chatded replied, drawing the distinction between
material and mmateral direct and collateral evidence
which he said totally separate divisions and that
evidence might be collateral and at the time
rial In the present be argued that all the period
extending outside the latter end Of June and beginning
Of July entirely collateral, and mmaterial too
The court sustained the objection and exception was
taken.
Q. What else did DR.. ouackenboss say on that trals
objection sustained and exception taken.)
The defendants counsel offered prove by this Wit
that DR.. Quackenboss testified the divorce suit
that Miss Ctons illness lasted from the Goth April to
the 10th september 1874 and that he paid her daily pro
fesslona visits between those periods and that his
count book contained an entry on the 10th September
and daily from that date back 10 the 26th April.
The Attorney General had nothing to do with offers
Mr. Whiting said he believed the Court of Appeals had
decided that such offers could not be the subject OF
ception he therefore put it in the form Of question
and Mr chatdeh objected on the former ground but
sustained II and exception was
Dr.. John G Cheeseman sworn-Was physician, and
had been for forty years He knew Miss Josephine
Clifton Had attended her professionally q. When?
OBJECTED to unless between the specified time)
Mr. Cark-If we put it in any other way, it win be
leading and won't vary it except matter OF favor
until the court has ruled Question overruled and ex
ception taken.)
Q. Did you ever attend her in the month of June or
July, 1874 A. NO; did not attend her during that
year daughter
q Did you attend her in consultation with nr.
Quackenboss OBJECTED to, being only intended to
contradict DR. Quackenboss, and wholly iumat erial
Mr., Whiting-Everythng is mmaterial on side,
Objection sustained, and exception taken.
q Can YOU state how often YOU attended her (Obec.
ton sustained and exception taken)
Mf. Whiting-We oiler TO show by this witness that it
was in 1s4S he attended her and that then she
sick, and not in 1874 at all.
O. Did you attend her in 1913 and If 50, at what
period
Objected to and ruled out Exception taken
Isaac Newton, proprietor OF line Of steamboats,,
srorn-First knew Doty in 1s45 40, steward Of
North river boat had further knowledge than in
necton with the boat his general character good
Cross examincd-Di not remember any speaking
OF his character previous to the trial Of the divorce suit
knew Of him than of other employees who had
been with them equally long, interested in the