The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-04-18
CHARLES o'CONOR.

CHARLES O'CONOR.
A REMARKABLE REPLY TO HIS ExExoIIAL TO
THE BAR Observation-Disclosures HAVE TAKEN
NEARLY ALL"
The following reply to remarks made by Mr. Charles
0Conor in his recent memorial to the Bar Association,
were yesterday the HERALD by Mr.. Henry sed-
ley brother-in- law to Mrs Catharine N Sinclair,
formerly Mrs. Forrest
To THE EDITOR OF HERALD
On the 10Th of March last there appeared in the New
York Times article referring to Mr. Charles OConor
and the Forrest divorce case On the 18th OF April fol-
lowing Mr.. O'Conor made public reply which, like the
frst article mas had WIDE circulation. Excepting her
young nephews l am Mrs. Sincairs nearest living
male connection This, with others TO be named here
alter, Is the consideration that warrants tho present
letter
saw the first article, It must be freely SAID, with
surprise and regret Its publication struck me, TO say
the least, inopportunc. II involved, in my view,
breach Of discretion and good taste for reasons PLAIN to
see.
should much prefer to leave tho matter ust here
without further comment, but Mr.. O'Conor has made
this impossible. He uses in his memorial 70 the Bar
Association the following words TO wit:-'As to tho
article question. will that nothing more vilcy
false than is in its whole and in all Its details
can well be imagined; in nothing that is material to
any inculpaion Uf myself does II contain even the
slightest color OF truth"
fear that by tins sweeping statement Mr.. 0'Conor
has placed himself in position from which not all the
power or good will Of the Bar Association can extcae
HIN.
ever instead OF being merely stunned by the noise Of
supposed charge and countercharge will take the pains
carefully to compare the first Times article with Mr..
o'CoDor's reply Will find that in many respects they
are substantially IN agreement The article reports
Mrs. Sinclair saying that Mr. o'Conor charged
81. 0C0 for trying her Mr. 0'Conor
ratey puts IT ut $1,000 Mrs Sinclair reported to
have said that Mr. OConor charged 900 Tor subse-
quent services Mr. 0Conor says precisely the same
thing Mrs Sinclair said interest charged
counsel fees. Mr. 0'Conor admits this, and adds
that in one instance the interest was coin
.la. In nfrtr nf Anfut fhn pflV
memory TO have been ut iault regards
figures but Mr. O'Conor lays stress and need
this. Ito mako tlIcse matters clear append to TINS
letter copies of the original bills OF Mr. oConor and
Mr.. Chase. In my possession, and marked "Note
Az and ''Notc BY Il does not appeal, SO far that
there any sound Justification for Mr. 0Conors
ton las TO the article in question, " that
NOTHING MORN WILEY FALsR
than IL Is in its whole tcaor and In all its details
we'll be imagined" Nor does there appear any objec
ton Mrs Slncairs statement that IL her under
sfandn. that her counsel took the case Free or that
she made any agreement for payment, either
Tor the ;rlal or The alimony proceedings, or
that Mr. Chase asked her TO sign card
Tor insertion IN the Ngw YORK HERALD, to the entct
that lawyers acting for her without charge.
The only real point OF difference to be that Mr.
OConor insists that Mrs. Sinclair or her friends
could have believed ths TO be really the fact and that
such assumption on any side is OF necessity abso-
lutey untrue. as well as injurious and calumniatory
To this must take leave TO say that have known the
lady and her family Tor twenty years. and that in
all that time heard Mrs Sinclair her family
express any other superstition than that which Mr.
Chase caused her to publish do not presume to
say Tor moment thal Mr.. oConor ought not TO have
charged counsel fees or to any criticism whatever
HIS action in that regard any further than this
that IL Is unreasonable TO that neither Mrs Sinclair
any one else could possibly have supposed such
thing 10 be true. when IL really was matter OF CON-
mon report and when there much circumstan-
tal evidence To uphold the superstition II true that
II was frequently reported that Mr. Forrest urged
for his pcrsstcncy ia opposing the payment Of
the Judgment his conviction that when IL should be
paid Mrs. Forests counsel would take all the money!
but neither that lady nor hcr friends for a
ment credited such conjecture
shall never forget the day which Mrs. Sinclair
received Mr.. U'conors ana Mr. Chaso's bills. Shc
brought them to my Office in Nassau street, passing
from the outer apartment into an inner OF private
reom where ! sat writing That the tidings OF tho
thundcrbot was pitiiully shown by what then hap
rened. Mrs. Sinclair as she entered tho room burst
taken nearly all IRON me- can never hold up my
head or pay my debts or be independent again. Oh,
how shall tell Anne." thcr sister. Mrs Sedcyl l
had never secn Mrs. Sinclair weep before, the
presence OF death, and was deeply and painfully
moved. II was soon after this that wrote the
letter to Mr. O'Conor which he has appended
TO his reply and snarked .No,cfD" and which,
when II Was scut TO him, | marked private"
The date on which Mrs Sinclair came to my Office with
those receipts was as remember, tho 18th or 18th Of
November, 1865 On the 14th OF November Mrs. SIN
clair according to Mr. oConors late statement. called
nj his Office IN search OF Mr. Chase. Mr. o'Conor, hav
ing on the previous day or the day before received his
check Tor $SSso0 II,
on rms OCCASION saw A PANORAMA
quote his precise words About the 18th 14th
OF November 1868, Mrs Forrest called at my Office Ter
about minute. and inquired, without effect, whether
would inform her where 10 find Mr.. Chase Some.
thing IN her indicated that she trouble.
The whole nineteen years OF my relations with
her passed before my mind on the instant, as
in panorama, and, though said nothing
OF the kind, then determined 10 act
no further IN any business for her" MI.
Nelson Chase who had nov received his $15,955 %,
soon alter likewise saw panorama, and with equal
rcticcncc the labor saving conclusion. lilo
could nowhere be found, and although repeatedly
asked SO To do neglected TO finish up the necessary
business o Mrs slnciair's Law suit The total amount
Just taken by these two gentlemen, irrespective OF the
allowance By the courts OF some thousands Tor counsel
fees. no mention OF which appears IN their bills,
S5& sci 03 bui their client then aud there had to
employ Mr. Richard H. Clarke. fdcsiguated as had
been Mr. Chase. by Mr.. oConor who charged and COL
cced from Mrs. Sinclair something $500 more for
finishing up the business and do not doubt, hon or
ably earned the money. tsee note marked CT
Bars. Sinclair has no recollection OF seeing Mr..
oiconor the day Of the '.panorana-n She only
members seeing Mr.. 0'Conors clerk.
Mr. Nelson Chase OF the original arm Of Rowland \
Chase the recipient, II IL shown, OF sl5,955 -
That y, this sum was paid at the time Mr. Otonor got
his SIS $50 IL. But some thousands OF dollars paid by
Mr. Forrest orders Tor Mrs. Forests
sci not mentioned IN either or any OF their
counts Nori there be found any alluslon to Mr..
Chascs collection OF regular percentages on her a-
mouy, to Which, when ~ was paid, Mrs Sinclair SUB
mtod Just before the settlement in November,
1885, Mr. Chase spoke to Mrs sinclair concerning what
would be proper lee for himself II should be UNDER
stood that Ar Rowland had very little to do with the
case AZ any time, and that during many years. next
preceding lstS Mr.. Chase, alone. Of that hrn. was
connected with the Forrest divorce suit. Mr. Chase,
or mole strictly his Arm. repeat, was brocghi into
the case on the nomination OF Mr.. O'Conor,
who hal previously been engaged in 1t. IL
always understood ny Mrs Sinclair and her iricnds
that Mr.. UConor was Tie absolute and despotic
master IA the whole business. IL was always under.
stood that Mr Chase took step the slightest
Importance without Mr. o'Conor's explicit direction
or sanction. When Mr. Chase spoke. as above Of his
own fee Mrs Sinclair, having hrst proposed that the
point should be referred TO Mr. 0'conor, and having
been informed by Mr. Chase that Mr. oConor had de-
clnod 10 IN the sum- agreed with Mr. Chase that II
should be $4,000 1ui she had fiot then the
counts notes and b. had little idea OF their con.
tents and certainly not the faintcst notion that tins
amount OF Sc 10 be In addition TO the two first
items in note u. which, however, MS viii b. socn foot
up some So COO fde last item IN Mr. Chnses ac-
count extent describes itself
Mr.. oConor says In his memorial: "whcn my bill