The New York herald., 1874-05-15
Street sprinkling Contract-suits Under tie
Consolidation Act-verdict Against the Long
Island RailroSd Company Convictions
and sentences at General SESSIONS.


bcStlneu tndt Mr. anu MIS-. Brlncktey went TO board
there soon after their alleged marriage and re-
NAMED there several months; they went by the
name OF Mr.. and Mrs. Lawson, and lived together as
man and wife; took their meals at the pubic rable
and associated with the other boarders in the par
ior; Mr.. Lawson. the only name by which she
knew him, told her that Mrs. Lawson was his wife !;
on one occasion ne went away for q short time
and In the meantime she had changed her servants
he came home late and inquired Of the new servant
II Mrs. Lawson was IN; ''She is,n answered the
servant, but 1t Is too late to see her. as she has
gone to bed - "But she Is my wife" said Mr.. Law
son; witness heard the conversation and told the
servant 1t was all right, and he went up TO his
room.
MRS. BRiNCKLEY RECALLED.
Mrs. Brinckley was again called to the witness
stand, the object being to allow to explain some
OF the statements called out In her cross-exam-
inatfon. Her drst explanation was how she came
70 bring the present suit in this city, She said thay
after the termination OF the legal proceedings
instituted IN Memphis, Tenn, she came here to re-
side, and having been advised by counsel II she
could ever come across her husband here she had
better have q summons served upon him, took
this course. Her next explanation had reference
TO the assignation house story. She said that she
and her husband, shortly before their marriage,
had been to theatre; that they stopped q: q res.
taurant subsequently,; that he drank to excess,
aI. ana while under me influence Of liquor had the
driver OF the carriage drive to an assguatlOn
house, or what al least he told her afterwards was
an assignatlon house; he took her by the arm and
covered 1t was not her place OF residence; she
satH, "rhis Is not my home p he said 1T is ali
70 20 snS ey m the
carriage and were driven nome; he apologized
most aumbly Tor the Insult. And, in winding up
him"
TESTIMONY OF DIR. !. B. MOTT
nR ,Anp - hnke
BE testified that he was called to professionally
ATTEND to both Mr.. and Mrs. Brinckiey while they
ne nad visited MRS. Brinckiey before her marriage;
sne introduced him to her husband; they went Dy
nands, and Mr.. Lawson told him to give the best of
medical treatmenC TO his wife and 40 all her case
required; subsequently Mr.. Lawson told Tim that
was Hugh Lawson Brnckley. that they bad been
privately married. but kept the TACT con Sealed Mt
and thereby exciting his dspleasure ana dsap-
Proval; At the proper time ne would make their
TESTIMONY OF W. r. MONROE.
The succeeding witness was MIR. w. r Monroe,
proprietor OF the Tappan Zee House at Nyack. HIS
testimony was very brief. He said that MIR. Brinck
ley, or Mr.. Lawson, as ne then knew him, sent for
him to call on him with o diagram OF the rooms OF
himself anu vile to board there; the plaintn was
introduced by Mr. Lawson as his vile; Mr.. Lawson
saaa sn ne was 1Ss S we cut ms We wouc come up
thought best suited Tor them they did not come
TO his hotel but they subsequently boarded at his
mothers boarding house In Thirtieth street; he
made out the bills which generally were paid by
Mr.. Lawson and sometimes by MIRA lawson; they
would not have been allowed to board there II they
had not been supposed to be married,
MRS BRINKLEY ONCE MORE ON THE STAND.
When the last witness had finished his testimony
Mrs. Brinkley was called upon to make further ex-
plantations regarding the testimony eicited on her
crosse examnatlon: She stated how she came to
90 to Sarat0ga with Mr.. George +. smith. This Mr..
Smttn, she said, was q brother OF Judge Henry Il.
Smith, OF Memphis, who had educated ner, and she
upon ner, and, nnding her in poor health, invited
her TO go to Saratoga, which she did, remaining
there three @ or ioar days she had a no % money. and
penses, as his brother would pay them back to
him. She ADDED that since her husband lett her
tives she heard had been continually on her track
In the nope to hunt up some evidence against
her. She was asked to tell all the iacts about "the
diamond story.n but, pleading great fatigue, was,
by consent Of counsel, allowed to postpoue the
recital TILL the time for putting in reoutting testi-
mony.
Considerable time was now occupied In reading
esse. The first deposition was that OF Mr.. Z. ,.
MOre q lawyer, taken at Brussels, Belgium. He
s ne as sss anne
called on her after the marriage and was intro
duced to Mr., Brinkley; she gave his name as
marrlage MIR. Brinkley said, Eyes, nave got .
nice little wife, and hope you Will get as good a
70 get rooms ior him ana his vile at Iauch's which
he did, aud they went there by the names OF Mr..
we're mainly rom hotel Keepers and trades peopIs
in Memphis, setting forth tnat the plaintiff was
there known as the deiendant's wife. At the
Hardwick House Mr.. Brlnkley was particularly In
uignant at some remarks made tending to convey
the impression that she was not his vile.
RAISING AN IMPORTANT LEGAL QUESTION.
At this point Mr.. Beach: senior counsel for the
plaintir, rose and argued the question as to the
legality O bringing into the case the ne matter a Of
general reputation was not to be considered here,
but SIMPLY q question as to fact. 1t had been
shown that at various times and In various places,
extending over long period, the defendant had
lived with paintif az her husband; had acknowl-
edged n her rs hs naa and sn as se
and at other times had registered himself as
Brinkley and sne as Lawson, always saying that
sending letters and dispatches to her to various
parts OF the country under these names, and taat
VARIOUS seS9u tines and places as wie oSsys ner nus
band, while he gave his directions to her as y hus-
band does to wife, what her reputation was IN
these several periods and what people may have
SAID about her did not affect the issue. i0r the
reason that each OF the parties concerned treated
cohabitatlon had SO continued aud had lasted
without any break. III such evidence as this was
noaep nos %S TO establish the positive lions
were man and vile, then he could go no urther.
M: Anthon the counsel OF the defendant, rose
vantage by the counsel on the otner side, as the
counsel whiie pretending to argue point OF law,
nou poSl ,aceioany huO partiy summing up MS
case, Wnie ne could not do this, as his case was
not YET before the jury. He hoped he should have
the same privilege hereafter.
Mr.. Beacn said tnat he had no intention OF in
any way summing up, but that he had endeavored
70 Keep To the subject under argument
Mr.. Antnon went on to say that a vital matter
with tne defence was to bring In testimony as to
previous reputation which was always admissible
was set uP as proof OF marriage. Tne chastity
OF the plantin wnetner previous TO or during the
cOhapitatOn with defendant was a u,lestOn when
would have much 10 DO win the claim that an mn.
ceremonial marriage had taken place. He could
show clearly that the character OF the pInintfr
was not what 1t was claimed to be- and tnat
greatly affected her claim TO being the wife of
delendant. Ihe counsel for the pla,ntifY hau
dodged the issue OF th's nnsnt by arguing upon the