The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-12-08
THE PETERSEN ABANDONMENT CASE.

q magistrate. @ -
THE PETERSEN ABANDONMENT CASE.
Argument Of Counsel ID ecision Still Reserved.
Yesterday tho complanan and defendan, in this
together with their friends assembled at the Third Dis
trie Police Court listen to the arguments Of counsel
(ME Reymert for Christopher Petersen, and Mr. Hnr-
rnston for Catherine Peteen in this remarkable
The auditorium crowded during the hearing Of the
argument and so Interested did the listeners SEEM that
upwards OF hour he counsel limited 10 half
an hour each) the utmost silence prevailed.
Mr.. Reymert opened the argument BY saying that II
did not seem to him necessary review st any length
the evidence adduced IN tho Of the preliminary
examination II was overwhelming ~ to the nnocency
Of h client and only surprised him that the complaint
would have been had the claim Of tho woman been
so aadacousiy presented and At the beginning with
must DO aware, The evidence subsequently taken
evidence OF seventeen responsible gentlemen-dis-
sipa'ed into air, tnin ar, these pretensions
pared deny the marriage OF this woman but it was
incontesble that she never was joined In marriage TO
his client. Christopher Petersen. Even Father Daily
the priest whom the complainant relied to prove her
and who was brought 70 this city at great expense
on his could not he said identity my
clsnt ~ the man whom she charges with being her
husband, and cshsbtng with her from November !,
1857 and from that date for two years and nearly four
Ss ne %s
that person, French Canadian the priest thought
that carried the whole Question, The person wSom the
complainant asserts was her husband s not Christopher
Peterson. We have proved concusvey that the years
and months she claims that he lived with her In the
laton OF husband and which claim her sister sustains
BY solemn avement, We show were passed. in this city
and Chicago Now, how could this man, living with
children also deceased in the years 1866 and 1867 Ia
Chicago. and this added to the fact that We have wit
~ hn orfnpo hat NH = n
out OF their presence ~ any time 70 exceed the
space OF two hours and while residing in this city he
Thus your Honor trace this man daily almost every
day, from bis arrival in this country in 1854 TO the
hour and Al no time coud be have been out Of
this city or Chicagothe only TWO places in which he
has resided except whom serving In the armywithout
the knowledge OF some one Of the very many who
know him And yet in the face Of these facts. this
woman declares this man her husband who,
seven years snco, abandoned her! When this
woman o raw MI Petersen s , Tor inc nrsa s,me:
OF credible witness SAID to her daughter, .This
your fatherI" TO whrh the child replied. "Mama,
shall Ne never End natherYn Mr. Rcy inert then re-
viewed, with particularly, tho evidence OF tho
several witnesses, and concluded by saying, sYour
Honor here close my review OF this most extraordinary
Casa case which has excited mucn inquiry and
sympathy this city. To Il has seemed
70 enter nio minute argument or assume any line OF
defence other than the plain facts addnced present.
Resting secure in our innocence, having proved by
number OF gentlemen whereabouts almost since the
have we covered those years wherein Il Is
declared be cohabited with Catherine Patterson as her
her We
trust our honor to your keepng prepared 70 ABIDE the
issue.
the arguments OF the counsel for Peterson, said IT
vas unnecessary TO go over the grouad again. He
dcnce of hrs. Quelch, who kept boarding house in
1855 in Monros that Christopher Peterson, then can
Ing himself Daniel, boarded with her--was an in
mate OF her housc for upward OF four months:
that she and served him ~ table and
that that his woman could Be- miaEen So intimate did
he bccome IN tho family OF Mrs Qnech that he pro-
posed to and was accepted IN marriage oy ner sister
she further know ana associated with him for further
period Of two years and nearly six months She per-
sists and her testimony Is nowhere shaken, that the
man, Christopher Petersen, now present. Is tho
man Daniel Petersen, who Joined her sister
4 agar. ySS5 o s
called behalf Of Peterson ask is II possible that this
simple mined, upr ght woman who bore two children
TO this and lived two years and three months with
him, in the conjugal relation can be mistaken to
IDENTIFY Impossible To this Testimony We add that
Peterson to the OF his knowledge belief 10 the
Daniel Peterson whom on the 1st OF November 1857 at
the house Of . NJ LACY in East Canada m 'hs pre-
Of matrimony 10 Catharne Maher, my client.
-Are ell these people mssakenf Have these
selves the sight OF God and man, and for whatY Let
the conscience OF Petersen answs-et the conscsnces
one point 70 which woud particularly call your aten-
ton ana the contradictions that follow. refer the
marks on Pstsr.sDs face His wife. catharine
Petersen, my client, and her sister swear
70 certain marks - bis nose, which scars
o. marks were thsss when he became hus
band 70 one and brother n-Iaw 70 the other
sister These averments the couneet for The defendant
endcavors rebu and he attempted 70 prove that there
were scars the mazs face until the year 1894 and
thAA they the result OF disease for which,
patient he received treatment the New York Hoep
tai ssvsmi witnesses testify 70 bis absence until
time subsequent TO his admission into that hospital
but, your Honor they prove TOO much. One Of their
most reliable witnesses declares thai there
his face IN 1862 years anterior 70 the time the
others swear his skin was smooth a. the face
tainted child How 10 this discrepancyand 10 only
among many which your Honor will dis
cover whom you weigh the testimonyto Be reconcilsd
with TRUTH The counsel continued in this strain for
some time. closing BY assuring his Honor that he
iaoorsd only for truth and justice and that he
paid 70 advocate the womans He felt she the
Injured party and he could not leave her without offer
Ing her assistance, bewever slight In urtherance
Of the assertion Of claim which he believed 70 be
Heaven itself.
At tho close Of tho remarks of MT. Harrington Justice
Mansfield stated that he would read the evidence with
great care and two weeks from yesterday Saturday,
December 81 y give his decision.
The parties Interested IN the case then Withdrew and