The New York herald., 1874-05-27
TIE BRINCKLEY DIVORCE SUIT.

The Contest Drawing to a Ciose-Rebut-
ting Testimony-The Plaintiff on the
Stand-The Case to Close To-Day.
The evidence in this now famous suit, in which
so much is involved was brought to a conclusion
yesterday afternoon, and as the case will in all
probability, be submitted to the jury to-day for
nnal disposition the result is awaited with more
than ordinary interest. Few contests OF the kind
have presented so many peculiar features incident
to matrimonial difficulties, and few have elected
SO many strange and contradictory statements.
1t shows among other things some startling
phases of hotel life, ana is altogether replete with
a lew sound and wholesome lessons. So far
nothing has been omitted TO present the question
at Issue in all It's entirety, that the attentive
listener from the commencement OF the litigation
cannot fail to be in possession OF fair estimate Of
the merits Of both sides. Only the final addresses
OF counsel and the charge OF the Judge remain to
finish the case, SO that should the jury arrive at
speedy verdict this afternoon the BrinckIey d.
vorce suit will by tomorrow have become thing
OF the past.
AS on the days preceding, the Supreme Court
room was well attended by the friends Of both the
tigants, well as by others attracted doubtless,
by motives OF curiosity, owing to the peculiar
ture OF the facts generally developed. Judge Van
Brunt took his seat on the bench promptly at ten
O'Clock, when the hearing OF the case was pro-
ceeded with Nearly all the morning was occu-
pied with the reading Of the answers OF witnesses
to certain interrogatories by PLAINTIFFS counsel.
chiefly 10 the early history, attainments, habits,
character and general reputation OF the plaintiff
prior to the commencement OF the proceedings.
These interrogatOries had been put to different
persons with whom the plaintiff, while pursuing
her educational studies or moving IN social circles,
points was gwen by the Rev. Mr.. Jones. an early
instructor OF the plaintiff; Or. John Chester, OF
se,ng orb their q a.
OF the piaintins character and talents, so lar as
their knowedge was concerned. Cross-interroga-
torres were also read by defendants counsel add
ing little, however, to what had already been
stated. After this weary proceeding, Tor the
reading OF the documents i'll question occupied
nearly three hours, MIR Beach stated that he de-
sired to interrogate Mrs. Brlnckley by way OF re-
butta.
At half-past one O'Clock the plalntin was called
to the witness stand, and in reply 10 Mr: Reach
gave rebuttinR testimony at considerable length,
In which the statements OF witnesses lor the de-
fence were emphatically contradicted. She de-
tailed the events which marked the early period
OF her history. Her mother, she said, died in 1851.
and her father IN 1865 she went TO Nine. Demetrezs
Female Educational Institute, where she renamed
until 1888; until she went to school at Jackson she
lived with her ather.
connection with her life at Jackson, and referred
TO the persons by whose influence she obtained a
position in the school until she graduated and the
Iames in which she resided during her stay there.
The witness further stated that sne graduated at
Jackson in 1859; she subsequently obtained stu
alton as teacher n Mississippi and afterwards In
Durhamsvllle, in Tennessee; she came TO New
York in 1862. when Mr. Brinckley and Mr.. Clarence
o mony % Of Mr.. Hunt Hunt and utterly denied his state
ments regarding the form Of Introduction to Mr.
avs ace
her and the defendant alter leaving
the theatre on the succeeding evening; sne had
Mr. Brinckley's family; his uncle, Captain George
Brinckley. had been an intimate friend OF her
length to detail the events which followed :he
visit OF Mr.. Brinckey and Mr.. HUNT contradctng
or tn by e nad e naa ann
sation with Mr.. Hunt in regard to the testimony
he would give In the suit; she had never any
knowledge OF being known az
THE SAINT PAUL DIAMOND WOMAN
Counsel mere read an agreement which set iorth
that the sum OF $4,000 would be paid 10 the plain
TN, provided that she would resign all claim upon
/ the defendant, and consent TO the acknowlede-
! ment taat she nad lived with him other than as
his vile. The witness, in reply TO MIR. Beach,
stated that she would have accepted the offer so
far as the separation applied, out refused to sign
1 any document containing such admission
as was demanded. In relation TO the conversation
she had neld with Mr.. Brinckley Sr., the witness
1 stated tnat she mad spoken TO him at the request
OF her husband, but that during their converse
the subject OF free love had never been alluded to
his son. but simply that they were living together
In regard TO Mr. DE Wolf, who had given testimony
no knowledge Of him whatever and that she Is had
never been introduced 10 him as MRS. Harris.
ConsiderabIe time was occupied relative to the
saint Paul. and she gave complete denial to all
the allegations which had been made against her
In connection with that affair. In conclusion, she
Indignantly and emphatically refuted the state
| ments made by Henry b. Cranmer. the detective
testimony distinctly and without hesitation, and
4 even the searching crosS-examnatton, which sue
GeTne' the elimination ] a. Of this witness broush. the
| counsel on both sides to-day