New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-01-19

Or ordinary capacity. Attne ZINC vi W. w " o 100
have been thirty years OF age A'''s' ' sue c'uia
net have desired much to appear 70 DC In ne' pre-
-. ;...,,.e ~ TO have denied her child. For she
IA - retain her beauty in her old age, like Nuon
rJr,.o.. still the case wss marked through
e,t NH scrupulous, point blank, exact negasion
- iii, relsiion. About the time of his
bntb she was potoriously unchaste. She
wing in open cobsbitstion with M. Dal1x whom, On
enisrstiDg to a country where q stfi;ter code Of
morals prevailed, abe Dared. NOordinary observer
eevh look at the facts in the case and not BE- led I,
Ae conclusion thst tte applicant was the hestimste
child Of Jeanne Dulax. II he was her nephew, who
wire bis parents He had DO pedigree. He seemed
70 have no connection with anybody except this
woman j, would never do 10 assu ne that thi, An,
j. p FeIre, was the son Of man named Ferre
end woman named DUNK For the presumption
= that case would be that he was illegi'imats. For
n al countries the woman took the name Of the IN,
Although there might be no more ceremony about the
nsrrisQe than about the sale of a horse. Marriage
e>uld be presumed from cObabtaton and repltati)n
kWbcb be considered 70 be the lOosest form OF EVIL
Sence) only where there could, from the nature Of
ne case be found other evidence. In the exam
ipation Of Mr. Ferrle there WA no such imp1ssibl-
n pretended And, M 70 positive testimony VIVA,
tssnoDy could the applicant rely to prove positive
marriage
Mr.. BRADY AGAIN.
Mr.. Brady read from the testimony of Msdelaine
G3rsier, that she was married in France in revolu-
6onary times" and that che had one child; that
abe wac very young al the time, and a. that was the
safe had DO more; and che complained tina; her son
eeet her great deal Of money. Nine. Gcsler also
stated when Nine. Dulux was hurt, she sent for her
She had cent for her son, ard SAID - Ny God, shah
:" die before see hun" Mr.. Brady also read from
the testimony of NJ DeRuerre, 10 prove that she
had told him tn she could not call him her son, il
veuld make her appear too old, and that he always
thought che married to Ferries fsther.
MR.. o'cosoR RESUMES.
NJ nro,o, resu,oed-Ua Droceeded 10 com nent
Q, the evidence of Mr.. Deguene. lie considered
\ 70 be very important, showing that she had
lead a dissolute life, cohabitD with NJ. Dulux,
While the was not married to him. NJ. De.
suerre had known her az kept mistress. Had
he any right TO aaduce from this that she married
IA Ferrie7 Ii is true he tells that in the revo
Istion such a state of siIairs existed that the
mage relation was something Ike the rel1tlon
Of an nDkeepe aud guest The guest goes away ia
Che morning, and the relation ceases. woman
mic hit have had dozen husbands IN "a many weeks.
But Desuerre merely states this 10 excuse his Az
sumption Of marriage. MIR. COnor then proceeded
70 comment the evidence of Nine. Gfiser. ASIDE
from the fact that this one OF those witnesses
Who had very benevolent insgisatioos, THIS was
Ne testimony Of a single witness against host of
other evidence. A very slight fault OF memory might
give totally false c0OriDg TO the testimony. But
the testimony itself could not refer TO Ferrie. She
was very young when her child was born Thus Is
the moot pOI the conversation She speaks
Of II as a why che had never had any Others.
Bat 1t il In proof that she was % or 30 years OF age
when be was born IL, indeed, he born.
Certainly, at that age she cOulo rot have suffered
from child. bearing before mmaturty. Here was this
solitary scrap Of evidence, without particle Of sup
psrt from any other II appears TO have been
drawn out Of her by reproacb against her OF ldk OF
vOmaphoOd. The case stood, assuming the relation
10 be that Of parent and child, palpably marked, as
the Ecclesiastical Judges say, with clendestiny Up
10 the time when Jeanne Duux went to France, in
1919 OF 1890 for her SON. either their relation
eret, large number must have known it. suppose
that 1t had been kept perfect secret every one sup
poting that he was her nephew, bad they not most
conclusive Gaze OF clandestiIity Was not the pre-
sumption overwhelming The suPpressto pert was
one of the great means OF fr aud. Ioe inference
could not but be that there was guilt ana shame
attending the circumstances Of his birth. She had
no lack OF maternal instinct AT that interesting
period Of their relationship every feeling of her
womans nature would have been gratiied by
aeknow Lodging aud nururiDg her child. What
woman would have her child uu sckDOwiedged among
strangers and learning that those strangers neglected
him-as she must have known, for II is In evidence
that she changed his situation several times On
that account What mother would DO it thus,
she were not compelled TO do SO by some
st1ogg motive, and what motive could be pre-
suned but guilt There was. indeed, most
powerful motive during the life OF M Dulnt Duiux
was carrying On his courtship at the very period a.
which that csd born. Ii he was it's father there
can be no pretense that il not legitimate If he
were not she would be pretending to him that she was
chaefe maiden. Mr.. " COLor concluded, therefore,.
shat there could have been ne cohabi'aton but the
contrary, no reputation but an absolute denial OF It,
euppose that she made it known to few or many.
They had then the theory tina, though known by her
friende il was universally denied. IL Madame DuluX
had had her correspondence specially retained to
chronicle the relationship Of nephew and aunt, they
could not have inserted oftenor than they had IN
speaking of her and Dulux. The very bills were ga
s'pair Of stock ings for your nephew. Seldom very
seldom, was he alluded TO as 1.-THE child or by
name. 1t seemed as though the writers knew that
h was not so, and were endeavoring to pile false
hoods on alseboods until they should, from their very
nass appear like truth. II these declarations were
sincere that was conclusive of the capdesine ns,ure
Of the relation Ii they were not the conclusion was
only 60 much the stronger Would II do to place this
ease on the testimony of Nine. Grsior alone against
tbese Irresistible conclusionsi According to Mr..
Ferre, she could not have kept secret, since he
was recognized by his Ferre relations. Mr.. o Con-
or read from letters TO show that she kept cTefuly
secret from N. Dulux. The case must stand II 1t did
stand, upon the favorable presumptions OF the law.
II would scarcely be necessary 10 run over auhorl
ties to support this view Of the law. He sttrio-
uted no Importance to the fact that in letter he
had addressed her as mother, and that she
ceedipcly indignant at it, and ne attributed it to his
smanueDss 10 excuse himself. The generaltendenoy
Of the facts too strong to require any particular
cerroboraton. No conclusion could be arrived at,
except that she desired to conceal relation igno-
pinious in the extreme and alike injurious TO herself
and her child. The marriage law OF France simply
proved that France was civilized country, that the
institution Of marriage existed there, and that the
mere fact Of child being born did not prove thst
there he'd been q marriage According to the Scotch
law, and 10 that prevailing on the continent mar
rage leeitimsted children born previously of the
came parents. Mr.. O'Conor concluded by expressing
The opinion that under view Of the case had the
s ssSa''n' even plausible claim to the 'dnl''''''-
Mr.. BRADY SUNS rr.
Mr. Brady, in summing up for the applicant, said
thst the gentlemans argument had proceeded entire