The New York Herald Newspaper, April 12, 1876, Page 4

His Beply to the Charges of Hy- pocrisy and Avarice. REVIEW OF THE FORREST DIVORCE CASE. | Honor of His Profession. & COMMITTEE OF INVESTIGATION. —_>—_— ‘The regular monthly meeting of the Bar Association last night was unusually well attended owing to a rumor that Mr. Charies U'Conor would be present and Bay something in reterence to certain charges preferred against bis character in one of the daily papers somo weeks ago. Inthe absence of the presidont, Mr. Van Winkle took the chair, A suggestion adopted at a meeting of the Executive Committee of the association on Monday that the asso- ciation should appoint a special committee to investi- gate the charges against W. C. Barrett, who had banded to his resignation as a member of the society, and, if the said charges were substantiated, to petition the General Term to divbar him, was adopted, and at the elose of the mecting a committee of three was ap- pointed for that purpose. Mr, Delafield offered resolutions of respect to the memory of the late Surrogate, in which the character of the latter was highly eulogized, They were unan- \mously adopted. Mr, Biliott F. Sheperd moved a resolution that each Judicial district in the State should be invited to elect twenty delegates to a State convention, for the purpose of organizing State Bar Association, whose objects whould be similar to the present organization, only it should operate ina larger field. The motion, after some bpposition, was carricd. CUARLES O'CONOR SPRAKS. At this point Mr, Charles O’Conor, who bad from the commencement of the proceedings been sitting on a sofa in a retired corner, with his head resting in his hands, and a general expression of weakness and wear- Iness on his furrowed face, came slowly forward tow- | ard toe chair. He was greeted with enthusiastic clapping of hands, which lasted for several seconda. Then Le began to speak in a low voice, very difforent from his ringing tones of a few months ago. The as- semblage, moved by ono impulse, closed up in acircle around him. “When this association was organized,’ said he, | ¢ Nestor of the Bar Vindicating the | fen \ rr | “Mra. Sine! without addressing the chairman ta particular, “I un- derstood that one of its objects, and in a great sense its chiet object, was to secure and maintain the honor of the bar by carelully attenaing to the duty of purify- Ing the profession by excluding from its ranks those members who by professional misconduct rendered themselves unworthy of a Place in it. That. certainly, was apnounced as enue of the objects, and your constitution declares the | © fact and suggests one of the methods of effecting that object as excluding from its body any member whose Misconduct has uniitted him to associate with lawyers end gentiemen. I have seeu, sir, within a tortnight, & etatement in. ono of the New York newspapers obarging one of your members who, if not honorably known, is certainly well known, with the most atrocious miseonduct that can well Le imputed toa lawyer. It is that he volunteered to serve aciient throughout a case gratuitously aud without compen- sation, and that at the close of the controversy, Daving been furnished with the opportunity, he seized upon her money to a very large amount and kept 18 under color of for services for which she owed bim nothing. This 5 conduct is charged in one paper, copied in and throughout the country the circumstance ts being commented upon. An: | have lately seen in @ leading newspaper of the West—a Chicayo paper, woll known—a sort of ‘rogues’ gallery”’—a list of law- yers who had, in the estimation of the editor, been guilty of atrocious and flagitious conduct. At the end of it was this statemeus:— “We now find that a lawyer iu the city of New York, extremely well known and hitherto supposed to be u jam of Lopor and iutegr: is found to be hke all the st—a rogue and swindler—and his name should be added to the ‘rogues’ gallery’ which we furnish.” Now, sir, | imagine when charges of this description are mi Known to the public through responsible channels and the honor of the professiou aud of this society—he happening to be one of its members—being deeply aflected by the imputation, that THE MATIRR SHOULD BK INQUIRED INTO and not passed over without not This bemg the | me to sign ac. | | | | the arrcurs of | | compensation | ’ i | | | Pe | r | a My object in addressing you Is to notify youof a duty imposed upon you by that provision. Tn the New York Times of the 26th ult. an article was published, of which the following is a copy :— CASRS—CHARLES O'CONOR'S LARGE FER WITH THE YOKEST DIVOKCK Caak—Wuat PAID YOR HIS SERVICRS QUESTION OF Mis DISLN- ‘TERESTEDNKSS—STATEMMNT OF MMS. SINCLALM. On December 16, 1851, the famous Forrest divorce case, in whieh Mrs. Cathar fortem, , wite of Edwin For: ‘ial in sband, came ou thi + caused the court room to be ial, which was closed on Janu Charles O'Couor was 0) yeur. Mr 1 tor the piniutiff, andJobu Van Buren for tne de of alimony ° During the whole ot the trial Mrs. Forrest sat by was escorted friends, to the and Chany short period. without means, who had been badly treated. On Fobruury 24, 1853, actuated by sentinents whieh Lelief in this sup- poned unvelfish and chivalric action Most eatin secret, ustice inspired, thirty of the bie ladies of this city, who kept their names a Mr. U'Unor, through Ubief & Ddenutiful “vase of freely xiven to » woman in O'Conor, alluding resented to acts P. A wal. @ te-timonial of the wid an ample reward for whatever of Inbor di Shortly afterward sixty of the most prominent the Bar of this city, headed by Mr. Daniel Lord, i wud acting upon the same sup: . OConor 8 splendid | banquet of General Chwrles W. pan massive silver “pitcher was spoiled by pre: guest. This work of art bore the aris of (@ kinsman of Mr. O'Conor'y), wrth, champion," Boner said:—"it is a principle simple instance of conformity The fouthin — Leaw. porter your nppinune id of May, 1 “found' an able aad eloquent advocate, who, without ci voted his time avd money to the pre Of ber cause.” The New York Bar, for 1855, suid M senemies are obliged to of ull selfish motive in the cure. rt ? many similar tributes paid to Mr. O'Conor in the bel vad yratuitously given bis professional aid to # woman sorely in need of such succ The alimony which had been allowed to Mrs, Forrest (now .” the name she has borne since the trial) was incrowse1 on May 4, 1860, under a relerence ordered by the General Term, te $4,000 a yeur, to date from November Mr. Forrest appealed, aud the mutter was argned onur lor Mrs, Bi 2, ald that in Mr. U'Couor Mrs. Forrest hud ne resulting iucrease os the wward of alim obtained nal $64,000 y a rtly after the having jromsed to pay any could deluy payment by legal proc ir appeured on the stage in this city as ‘Teuzle in “The schovl tor Scandal,” and Panlive in“) Lady of Lyons,” in order to obtuin means of support, aud drew crowded houses nih she subsequently ap- pearcd im California, receiving a high testimouial of ro- Epect from the citizens of Sun Francisco at her departure. » trial It hes been reported recently that O'Conor, in- stoud of | hi iven servi tously of the en step: tinued for es shortly att re money trem Mr. Fore: porter of the Times called on near New Krighton, States lation tu the matter. Mrs. bin stately looklug woman, ubout Blty years of age, recoived th reporter in the inoxt courteous manner, and answered bis in- Hiably ae follows :— r, when he took the caso, that I had no understanding that he took it free, T any ag nt to pay bin auytiing either f the alimony proceedings. About the time of the trial the New Youw Hiway said that, th ull eaten up by the lawyers, und Mr. Chuse came to me and told we nbout it, saying, ‘You know that that is not trce, as we have taken the caso ireo uf v you,” und hy waked o the effect that my lawyers were acting teourse, 1 yindly did, know- ? Henan {1 was also sent to the Courier and Buquire of allmony amounted to $04,000, and of th 30,00) was totaived by Mr. O’Cuuor, for which ® bill wi presented which fy in the pnss Hei my brother-in-law. Ol the $8,000 $40,000 was charzed by Me. 0’Cunor and $19,000 by Mr. Nelwun Chase, who act-d estate in lieu of a dower. A re- Sinclair at her residence, 4, to make inquiri tor we withuu i as Mr" were 87,U60 for the trial, $2,500 lor urging the appeal ut Albany dod $10,000 interest. 1 did uot initiate « suit agal Mr. OfConcr, but J did think of suiug Mr. Chuse vo recover Teodteluded not to when I found f n Mr. Forrest died. to more; but [ imo 8 that was give me above what was charged in the bill, veing $000 out of the $84,000, Mr. Chase paid oimself and Mr. O'Couor and rave me the baiance. When this bill for 83,000 came in L felt xore about it, notwithstanding ‘titude to Mr. O'Conor. 1 thought der any cir- umatunces, and 1 was expec reference to the items for fF. Chase’s services und lor the charge of $2,009 fo tonisiy Wor were some charges advanced me by him, and these I expected tu pay, of . and was ful for having received. 1 aim not com plaining matter, and should not bave said any- thing about it for publication om my own volition; but you have asked me forthe facts, aud Ihave given them to you, During the time between the trial und the recovery and ‘ment of the alimony, 1 had at tet w Keting, but I subsequently ran tuto debt, . Taylor $4,000, whieh be had kindly loaned ments trom time to tims. J expected tu got all ny aimony except wins was due to Mr. U'Conor. for advances and ‘expenses, and pay these debts, wnd Tiwand that I was tu have only $5,000, 1 iil of 'Gonor te Mr. Taylor us evidence th pay him then, and he showed it to Mr. Charles Manu, who’ commented — severely upon — it, A. Mr. O'Conor made # yreat reputation out of the case, which e more than paid him in a pecuniary specially us the eredit he got for conducting the erat ary. 1 inj sly gave him celebrity all over the fe ceful to him for his wonderful «md :avors | jo my t 1 was certainly unprepared for such a de- nouewent. The article studioualy abstains from any direct case and the individual who addresses you being the | person to whom the public statement refers he has prepared a printed statement, tirst of the charge, next, denial of its principal facts, a de- ces, which would tend to show that it was untrue, ven invite your arsociation to adopt such measures for investigating the matter us the ov- rasion may requi sort of investigation tbat you may think proper, before your body or betore u sort of jury or body of triers taken from the wercantile Coumunity, or from the clerical body, or in fonxble way that may be Mherefore suggest as the proper course (he appointment * cotnmittee to act in such a Way as nay be decmed tecessary. 1 present the memorial, which at this late sour | would not be justified im reading to you, and I gest again the appointment of a committee imme- hately, as it would seem to require but littie delibera- don ut this time. That, however, I submit to the asso vation, I band you the memorial, sir, aud | will have Ese for distribution, jere Mr. O'Conor handed the chairman a pamph- Jet, of which wo give a copy below, Mr. Sewell moved to refer the matter to the Commit- any other rea- | thought proper. [| He proposes to submit to any | ither | i | charge any services iu the business charge of fraud or uniairness on my part toward Mrs, Forrest, unless # taint implication of that kind may te involved certain words imputed to ber. It is.mot directly stated what I over promised or intimated to her ap intent to perform gratuitously or without referred to. Neither is 1 assertea 1m any way that any charge which 1 did make exceeted a fair compensation for my services. Yet, casual readers of the ar- ticle would naturally suppose that I had actually undertaken and promised to serve the lady gratui- tously, and that I had wferward, in manifeet violation of that chgagement, seized upon her mouey and traud- Wently retained it on ay unfounded claim ior compen- 10n. The article was d ned to convey this meaning and must be se understood. All will admit that the Jawyer or layman who could commit such a fraud as is thus, by implication, charged upon me, is untt for | admission into any respectabie or honorable society. It the article can be thought to charge only tbat while the coutroversy between M1, and irs. Forrest was pending, agenera! beliet prevailed that I had volun- teered to serve the lady as counsel without charge, and | that I, well knowing the existence of this belici, de- rived distivetion aud other advantages trom it, all the lee on Grievances as the proper body to consider the | matter. Mr. Hand thought no one present ever believed the jor a moment, but he would deter to the wish O’Cogor, and move the appointment of a special tommitice. Mr. Coudert thought Mr. O’Conor exaggerated tl importance of the charges, coming trem the sou they did, and thought it would bo to the credit of the association to take bo notice of them, Mr. O'Conor's timetutending to charge for my services ana get pay. | ment from the lady wheu an opportunity should occur, ail honorable men Know that such conduct as tne | article would impute in this latter interpretation of it, word should weigh ayainst all the nowspapers tbat | aver received corporation printing. This statement was received with loud, hearty and be | continued applause by the assemblage. fr. O’Conor, who, during these remarks had sat Bervously twitching his fingers, now ruse, and, with much warmth and pot a little resentment inmngled with jonch of sadness in his ione, said don’t wish it 40 Le understood that | come here for the purpose of VINDICATING MY PTATION or of saving it from attack. 1 have no object wheth my reputation be good or bad I have material interest in it. iaterest of haman life. no I have preity much passed all T am concerned in bo public matter that renders reputation a thing of wny conse. quence to me whatever, [am concerned in no private jusiness which would muke it desirable for me to extend secure a xencrally favorable opinion, Ihave no doubt at all that those who actually know me and have observed my course of life aud conduct hardiy desir- even so much as a denial in reference to any imputae Hou upon my professioual ur personal conduct. And for the outside world, for those whow I don't know, with = whom do vot come = in contact, L bave unly to say that as to them hilst I do not covet their ill opivior, I wish, to protect myself against any possible intlucace it might bave, no pther weapon than coxscious RECTITUDR, Ido not ask even my dear (riends to say one word for me. 1 could stand ag @orid upon that capital, and would rather scorn Uh Aid which would como up to attempt tn vindical character against the crowd who know me not I know well the feelings of the two gentlemen who have addressed you. They are of the kindest poss de- seription, but | cannot tor these reasons concur with them. I have asked for an investigation. That is not and up and st the wide the precise form of my prayer at this time f Rave to ask for an investigation, to be sure, bet I bave asked that a ‘committee bo wppointed to consider this memorial and to act thereon promptly, as it may seem to require, And my reasons are for the honor of the protession, which. by periit- charges of this description to be circulated unan- twered against one of its members, who happens ve aud weil known, The honor uf the pro- assailed, wot by sitting ‘Wo are satisiied with tho ttegrity i this society cam protect the ainst assault Tho conclosion of Mr. O'Gouor's address wag greeted with louder applause than were his liret remarks, Mr. Sewell withdrew lis motion. Mr. Albon P. Mann shougat prompt action should be uded that the committee appointed rinight, Mr. O'Conor moved un. im his seat at thiy suggestion, report at BS epecial meeting, to be beid on Tuesday night next. THE VINDICATICN. ‘The following is the memorial presented by Mr. O’Conor:— To tax Bam Association Yous :— Your society was organized, among other objects, ‘to or tux Cirr op New | Lagree to pay all such expenses attendant upo Maintain the honor and dignity of the profession.” Its | comstitution provides that any ber may, on con- vietion, be “suspended or expelled for misconduct in hus profession” Js at least as mean and contemptible and as justly pan- fahable with social ostracism us any gross fraud or thett, If lam guiity of what ischarged in either as- pect of the article, or any part of it, Lought to be ex- peiled from wembcrebip im your association, and from the Bar itself, as a disgrace tu both. I shoud also ve refused a place in nny reputable organization, This would nly be so were the vietim of the tinputed fraud Dot unbounded wealth; the fact that th suflerer was a woman without means y protector would greatly intensity the disgust thercat of all honest men. Tam a counsellor-at-law of more than fifty years standing This, with my long practice in the metrope- lis of America, if there be uo other contributory cir. to society, to your us. Aud cumstance, renders my relations asseciation aud to the Bar somewhat consp certainly, if Lam guilty of the pr alleged, or any part of it i any tion, | am a tt sub whateve as-oviation or the cum reason | have considered 14 proper to demand, at your hands, an imvestig tion of this whole subject, and to declare my readiness and desire to appear at once bo- fore my peers or betore any other fur tribunal and to repel the charges tude of insinuated, Oar elder law society could nor so well be mvited to this task. Lum and have been for several yeurs its chief officer. Iu your association Lam only a private member. df have rarely been within the walls ol ity jomielie, Dor until this day have | ever attended on of its meetings. Ever since its commencetent [ been undeservedly honored with the charrmant one of it# committces; but f have never a more than one m ug of that committee. these circumstances 1 cannot be supposed to have influence in your bouy that could, in any way, inpede vigoro.s investigation which should the be made when +0 base an offender as 1 am chargod ‘with being, is placed on trial for bis crimes, lo this connection it has vecurred to me that a trial beiore a tribunal im any way chosen by myself might be ex- cepted tu, Again, | have been a resident of this, iny ive city, contiuuously lor the last sixty six years, and my accusers might doubt whether in’ any ‘social body here existing a pericet absence favor rd me could be secured of a desirable rigor be employed iw judging me, And as 1 Wisit TO BR THED in the manner most mercilessly rigorous, as against me, that any one could think suitable. I present cers turn proposals to that end. Twill ebeerfully submit to atrial and judgment under any of the following cir —Fust, let any number above twelve, nerehunts or any other jay class, be se- fear the evidence, and, uunee the proper judgment; wudly, let there bein ke Mmauner chosen from Totestant and Israciitish clergymen of this etty a hike howy of triers to hear and decide the case No one can doubt the competency of such a tribunal to Pass upon the moral question involved. It any muditi- cation of these wethods, or any other method that can be thought shull be suggested, it will alford pleasure to concur ih it; and whatever, 1 shall be adjudged to o business referred to, many degree, however shgbt, irom the line of conduct eujoimed upon a lawyer or a gentieman the strictest principtes of integrity or honor, I sell, whether you expel me or wot, forth jnQuish avy Membersiip in your assoc! and in every soc jo which | may belong, the Bar iteelf, Aud in any event of reasonable, me great tay be #liowed by your society or by the body decide ing the cas As to the procedure now invited, I have jn absolute divorce on the | in De. . 187d, when Mrs, simelair received «large sum of Sedley, | inor's uttorney, Among the items of the Dill | ceived $95,000 in age | forbear from any advocacy of my interests and limit his action within the uarrowest bounds that bis o' | sense of social duty will permit. —ludeed, I would lil | to be tried by those who regard me with tho least | measure of good will. If trices bo selected | Outside of your soctety, | ask only that they | be persons not concerned in publisuing the article above meutioned, and not | of very decidediy bad repute. I wish that your com- mittee, who may have charge of the premises, may invite the two New York journalisis who have’ pub- lished these charges to undertake the prosecuti | against me. If they will employ counsel and | witnesses I bind myself to pay all of their outla; coun-el iees or other expenses that may Ve allowed to them by your society, or by the body deciding the case ;.and i pledge mysell never \o give ip. evidence, or treut ag an offence, any act they may perform, or ill | Will they may display in the prosecution, though I do bot mean by this to give them any license in respect to tuture publications by them in newspapers. But if theso two journalists neg- lect the invitation which shall th given them, or failin any degree to prosecute earnestly their charges before the tribunal selected, I will cer- | tainly, afver the de resort, ag against them, to such methods of redress as be practicable on account of what they huve ulready | dope As to the article in question, I will say that nothing more vilely faiss than it is: its whole tenor and in all its details can well be imagined; in nothing that 18 ma- terial to any inculpation of myself does it contain even color of truth, proceed to reiate all circumstances connected with the business in question which f can conceive | might be useius in guiding 4n bopest and enlightened Judgment to a sound conclusion touching the charges | preferred against me. About the year 1843, a judgment having been ren- dered in the Supreme Court on a report of reterces against Mr, Edwin Forrest, the eminent tragedian, Lis | wltorney retained me to prosecute us counsel in his be- half a writot review. Toonducted the business, and | the judgmeut was reversed in the Court for the Correc- tion of Errors (Forrest vs. Kissam, 7 Hill’s Rep, H 8. CU, 25 Wendeli’s Kep., 651), I bad seen Mr. on the stage; aud 'I think that ouce, soon | after his success in that cas+, be gave me in the street a gracious bow; beyond this T never bad any intercourse with’ Mr. Forrest or any o: bis family or friends prior to my interview with Mr. Parke Godwin and Mrs. Forrest, hereinaiter mentioned. The case of Forresy vs, Kissam arose out of the circumstance that Mr. Forrest bad provided his able aud brilliant friend, Wilham Leggett, with a eom- fortable dwelling in the country. The testimony pre- sented Mr, Forrest in the most captivating ght; his biographer will zo doubt cousult the record. When, | tn the first week of January, 1850, Mr. Purke Godwin, | till then a total stranger to me, ealled at lay office, in ompany With Mrs. Forrest, whom bo introduced to ne ag a client, [ regarded Mr. Forrest as a very gener- o”s nau in the disposition of his money, All passion, excitement or prejudices that conics may Lave geuc- rated having long ceased, 1 will say that I cunnot recall any tact known to me or gutisfactorily proved that inclines me at this time to think di ently of him. At the interview just mentioned the lady informed me that she and her busband were jiving upart; that they had agreed upon a« permanent separation, and that she desired my services as coun- sel jp adjusung the terms and superintending any neediul papers or procecdings. 1 was not willing to have any controversy with Mr. Forrest. Besides, I had two years previously been rcleased from advovacy for a busband in a very disagreeable divorce cuse, and had then determined uever agaio to be con- cerned in any such controversy; but adjusting the terms of an amicable separation did not conflict with these views, I was impressed, and perhaps I may say moved, Ly Mrs, Forrest’s very amiable deport- ment, together with a real or fancied resemblance in | kinswoman, then long departed. 1 learped irom her that some kind of an undefended divorce was | contemplated; but her idcas concerning its nature were quite indefinite, She did not suppose that, in | obtaiming it, there would be w necessity of impeach- | ing her purity; nor was she willing to acquiesce in uny such imputation, (Forrest Divorce Case, | 807, 308, 319, 282, 283, 256, 257.) Ip the attemps ata setilement thereupca made, my mtercourse was, I bo- Neve, wholly with Mr. Theoucre Sedgwick, sinee do- creaged, aud, possibly, one of bis professional ussoci- | ates, also since deceased. We did not agree, aud avout the end of January, 1850, preparations were made by Mr. Forrest to obtain a divorce from the Legislature of | | Pennsylvania, bis native State, (Forrest Divorce Case, p. 361.) In March, 1860, Mrs, Forrest presented to | that body a protest aguinst any ee by it in tue | premises, This paper is very full apd explanatory; | at was extensively published; and, if the newspapers of the time can be relied upon as expressing the public sentiment, ft won for the lady almost, if not quite universally, golden opinions, (See same case, p. 579.) Although Mrs, Forrest did uot appear op Mr. Forrest’s logisiative applications, and declined to cross-examine the witnesses producea by bim in New York, these applications fatled. (Same cuse, pp. 308, 300.) ‘The Pennsylvania Legislature adjourned in May, 1850, and Mr, Forrest’s nvxi step was an application to & Philadelphia court for a divorce in August of that year, (Same case, pp. 310, 36 to 3&8) Two or three days subsequently Mr. Forrest met me in Wali atrect anc made to me certain remarks which [ cannot say were very offensivo, but 1 thought the Interview placed it out of my power to dechne or retire the advocacy of his wife’s side in the controversy, if she saw fit to retain me. | have some- tumes thought that but for this circumstance I wouid ings im this State, as I had absolutely determined to avoid ull such business; but | am not cure of i, 1 had, in repiy tu their letters, corresponded with’ some of the Pennsylvania Seuaiors, | bad thus committed myself as au advocate jor Mrs, Forrest, and’ { bad ad- vanced $200 in expenses attendant upon my measures tw defeat tbe Pennsylvania appiication, | thought well of ner, and so: Cunbot retire trom a cause be- Heved to be just alter, im even a limited way, espousing it. Un September 2, 1850, Mra. Forrest commenced an action agaiust Mr, Forrest in the Supreme Court uf this State for a limited divorce, and soon after obtained therein an injunction restraining ike prosecution of his Philadelphia sai, On November 10, 1850, sie sued him in tho New York Superior Court tur an avsoiute divorce, on the grouud of intidelity, In the latter caso he recriminated, and these cross actions of iseues | were tried betore Chief Justice Oukley and a special | jary during the court duys ween December 15, 1 and January 26, yen a verdict | was rendered for Mrs. Forrest She claimed alimony at $8,000 per annum aod the jury awarded it, (Forrest Cause, p. 24.) Mr. Forrest touk exceptions und appealcd tu the General Term, which, on July 24, 1956, uitirmod the divorce, but, nold: tug that it was not within the jury’s province te tix the amount of the alimony, reierred that subject to Alvin ©, Bradiey retere (Fort Case, On December 1, 1859, Mr. Bradley reported that ali- lowed from tbe commencement of ser rate of $4,000 per annum. Tho report was contirmed by |, Proper credits being allowed tor inter- mediate payments tw ner, the balance then due for | arrears Was adjusted at $35,503. Neurly $1,000, iu addition, were cllowed tor taxable costs in her suit; and judgment was entered in her tavor for these two sums ou June ¥, 1860 (fF urrest Cuse, p. 1,063). Mr, | Forrest tminediately uppeaicd ve the General Term? where the judgment was afirmed on December 7, 1861 (orrest Case, pp. 1,078, 1,051). He then appeaied to the Court of Appeals, wuere the Judgment against him was again affirmed, December 41, 1x2 (Forrest Case, p. 1,889; 26th N. Y. Rep 501). Mr, Forrest's sureties on the appeal declined to pay aud judgment was recovered against them on thelr undertaking Uctober 8, 1803, ‘They then appealed to the Genera: Term, where tue judgment against there was altirmed, November 10, 1933; and ov their further — appeul, a final and irreversible’ judgment was given vem in tne Court of Appeals, in September, (Forrest vs, Havens, 38 . Rep., 469), yen ber suit wi menced, 1p 1850, Mrs, Ferrest: was living apart from ber husband on an’ allowance of $1,500 per annum, voluntarily made to ber by bi ‘This -be continued to pay until th dered agamst him im Javuary, 188: watds pal ber anything except on judici Y From August 1, 1859, until May 7, 160, he pad her, vader orders of the Court, $200 per mouth part of the time und $250 per mouth fur the residue, (Forrest Case, p. 1,005.) When thejudgment of the Supreme Court ; was rendered in June, 1860, le was compelled adequately to secure to her the annuity of $4,000 ; er anvum, then adjudged to Ler as pertanent alimony; aud themes forth unts euth, on November wy, 1872, be pard it to her ac ty. (Forrest case, pp. 1,005, 1.066.) ie wall wibat the arrears adjudged to Mrs Forrest. ou June 2, 1800, formed her euure demand against her busbane and Ut reumstanes could ase it. Surprise ma: forg be red by tae iact that on November 12, 1868, in closing the business Mr. Forrest was obliged to pay the large sui which her attorney then re i The cr cummatunce 18 easily accounted: for. of June 2, 1960, Mr. Forrest's persistent resistance caued, ay We have seou, the recovery of five subse quent jud, wd on every one of these five ugea- sous add: Table cusis were recovered and @ new jud; wt given for the vame, with interest on the whole sem then wapaid, Thus five rests occurred in tbe account against Mr. Forrest di the peculiar etlect ot compound’ iuterest. Nor wus Wis all, When, tn Septmoer, 1863, final judgment was recovered against the suretics, the Coart of Appeals, on motion of Mrs. Forrest's coun- sel, muleted them ten per cent im addition to the principal aud interest then duc, by way of punishment Jor their vexatious resistance of justice, Tuis amounted to $4,590 24; hence the singularly larg ition of about $80,000 to the sum which had been adjudged om Jane 2, 1st, tor the arrears aud costs of suit. MKS. FORKEST HAD A SINGULAR PIKCE OF GOOD FORTUNE in another respect. fi January, 1902, when awarding Judgment otherwise favorable to ber, Chief Justice Vakley required her, on being secured h to relinquish ber comtingeat righ! this part of the judginent her an appeal, when proved successful uly 24, 1856, saved ber do right; and, as a uence, on December 15, Mr. Forrest's death, ‘she received tor her dower im bis estate $95,000. If this sum has not been lost or tmpaired (Which, I regret to say, may reason- ably Le apprebended), it is huw iu Ler possession, and. forins, ali will admit, an adequate provision tor the ce Of a childless widuw, charged with 00 cumbered by no dependants, as | now View it, was a very extraordinary on ed great talents, and, onless tm that controversy be made a subject of cet he has vo biemish upon bis vain He labored igen! as ao actor, aod Wat emineutly successful, ‘Thou capable, as Was seen, of great generosity, he was al- ways exiremely cconomical. The spirit which ,uided bim im this was proved io his dying hour. It seems | ne nad devoted himself through iife to an object | whieh many will deem most laudable. Ho | he most icious scale, themselves persons | mination of these proceedings, | ber frank countenance to my nearest and dearest | trom | never have acted for her to any of the judicial proceed. | ) | She following loans: Alter the recovery | ing this poriod of eight years, producing * oversy between Mr. and Mra Forrest, | Mi NEW YORK HERALD, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, 1876—TRIPLE SHEET. and which should also perpetuate the memory of his own name and virtues. / Ho marricd Catharine Sinclair when she was but | Bigeteen years of age. ing of her “grace and | beauty,’’ the only witness examined to the pout suid, | i | 3 “She was tome periection. She was the mont beauti- ful vision Lever saw.” Until their uuloreunate sepa- ration, she was uniformly dutiful as oue who deemed u ‘She was respectful and al- wife bound to “obey.” she was fectionate in her demeanor to Mr. Forrest, prudent and economical in her expenses. k rendering a8 required by bim exact accounts of them. Sbe im his theatrical wardrobes; she made long Journeys for and with bim, and constal ‘und dilgently labored to was the lignt of complishments and her carnage im | the presence of his friends and visitors she gratified his pride immeasurably, and, wo doubt, advaneed his interests. When tho separation took place (1849) ber lady-ilke | beauty, though perhaps chunged to a more @ mould, was undiminished; and that be then still | | loved her and hat the most absolute confidence in | ber purty 1 bave always tirwly beli Why he put her away from bin can only be @ subject of conjecture. Ever since the trial in 1852 mine has been what I will now state, Some year or two be- | fore the separation the’ project of the asy.um for | decayed actors was tered = upon. | Ere to erect a suitable building on the bai judson, to use it as a dweliing house duri j liv then to leave it for the Actors’ Home, with | | the residue of Mr. Forrest's fortune as au endowment. This involved the notion of a jal regidence costing: | a large sum for the house and furniture at the outset, ' | Is would necessitate a considerable yearly outlay m | | i & | Maintuining & style commensurate to appearances; Mr, | Forrest probably bad not at the time sufficient means | to deiray tho a expenditure. The devotion | of his whole time to labor as on itinerant | theatrical star would scarcely bave produced « | sufficient income properly to ma:ntain “Fonthill Castie,”” with its qaeenly mistress. | dire,’ Forrest | | thought not of expense, She thought of hitie but ex- | ecuting the wishes of ber husband. Probably she was quite incapable of cot jeripg the pecuniary question, and, unfortunately, cer husband dia nut give it due re- | Uection, The separation occurred just ut the moment when this Fonthill eutorprise had reached # stage which caused Mr Forrest to pe:ceive 11s probable effect upon hig fortune apd the dreary future in which its | completion would necessarily invive bit, His castle was in the highway of travel; it had attructed great at | tention, and bow to recede was a difficult prob- | | lem. Accustomed to five upon that dpplause of the unthinking which changes to seora vp its hero's failure in anything, be shrunk {rom | the idea that, im popular parlance, -Fontnint Castle” should change its name to ‘Forrest's Fully ;? and, tor want of @ better contrivance, he determined to have 4 quarre] with his wife, for some private cause | not ‘to he explained, The breaking Up OF his ‘amily would, of course, afford a reasun for relinquishing his | rural residence; and, deeming his wite subservient to | | his pleasures in ail things, he sapposed that she would | submit to this gary, and that, after he bad gotton rid | of the castle and a few’ months, had clapsed, | there could be # aod all would be | well But, as might bave been expected, this | singular contrivance failed. One mistake ted ‘to | another, aud the judicial controversy in question | resulted, If, in this judgment on the evidence, | | bave donc any wrong to Mr. Forrest, such ia not my object, I imugine it to be just; nor will it be easy to reach any result more in his favor. 1 now proceed to state my pecuniary relations with | this lady. When! became ber counsel in 1850 1 was | Bot im practice as an attorney, It was requisite that other person should act for ber in that capacity, I ommended Messrs. H id & Chaseto ner and | | she employed them. Mr. Howland was a géutleman | Of large estate, If I correctly informed, Mra, | Forrest was on the most cordial terms with bit until iu September, 1870, Iso understand | that from 1860 unl! the presont time sho has bran a | visitor ol Mr. Chase, and that they have always been | on excellent terms. Throughout the controversy her | | Dasiness association wus almost entirely with these at- torneys cr one of them She aad comparatively little | correspondence of any kind with me Mr, Chase is | said to have been my attorney. This is not true. Hoe | never had any greater business or otber connection with me than other attorncys who used my services | us counsel; he never even kept wild office in the samo street with myself. 1 never liad any but the most trifling and casual knowledge of his pecuniary dealings | with Mra, Forrest until the present month (April, 1876), and I nover saw acent of money belonging to her or supposed to come trom her except the one payment | hercatter mentioved, which was made to me by Mr. Chase on November 14, 1868 This was after the | whole busincss Lad reuched its termination, All the | moneys ever received for Mr. Forrest were paid to Mr, | Chase or his firm, and duly receipted for accordingly. Proof of these receipts was quite readily acccssible, | Mr. Howland was perioctly respousible at all times; | Mr. Chase was so, at the time of his only large | receipt tor ¢, In November, 1968, | It was easy to sue these persons and recover all | Mrs. Forrest could claim of the moneys received \ on account, There was no necessity of includit | me as a defendant in any suit for reclamation; but if T nad wronged her as suggested why should sno or any one hesitate to prosecute me? Such villany as is im- puted to me would have cancelled any claim f coula othcrwise have had upon the lady’s tayor or consid. eration. « | During the ten years that the controversy was pend- ing prior to the final judgment of the Superior Court | on June 2, 1960, expended tor Mra. Forrest and in | the necessary conduct of her cases various sums of imuney, which, with interest on each | to that date, amounted to i$ 40. Tho account of these expenditures | | was then tnado up, examined and approved by Mrs. | Forrest. One of the iteing was the sum of $1,000 71, pnid on June 15, 1852, to Dunicl D, Howard, keeper of \ ine Irving House, in liquidation of bis bill gunst me tor Mrs. Forrest’s board aud rooms tu that hotel duriug | | the nial, The severo winter weather whick prevaik | at the time cre: an apparent necessity of thus ac- | Commodating the lady neur the Court House. i Mrs, Forrest's preparations to that end ving | | been previously made, she went upon the o in New York immediately atter ner victory. She pur- sued that occupation in Atlantic States tor some time and then went to California, where, from Muy, | 1853, to April, 1856, she was an actress, and tor , some part of the time a stage manager. She wout ‘thence to Engiand, her native country, via Australia, and after a stay of erghteeu mouths sbe returned to | New York in emucer, 1858. (Forest Case, pp. S62, | 564.) During this perio’ proceedings in her suit were scarcely of the kind called active, though mach impor- tant work was done init, Atter her return to New York—say in June, 1859, when she was understood to | be very needy-active measures were commenced to fix nd secure her aliinony, and, as above shown, Mr. | Forrest was compelled to make ber fair allowances thenceforth until bis death. Subsequently to June, 1660, | made to Mrs. Forrest March 12, 1863, $1,000 May 28, 1863. . 760 November 14, 1863. 500 February 18, '1865 7,500 Septomber 20, 1867 " 500 If T_ recoliect aright the large loan of $7,500 was | made to relieve some alleged embarrassmenis under ‘which the lady then labored, notwithstanding the am- | | ple income she bad been enjoying for the five pre- | | ceding years. | Atter this large loan rumors, in one form or other, | rouched me {rom time to time, that Mra. Forrest was involved in debt and in much consequent uneasiness. | ; Oa February 6, 1867, she solicited from mea further | loan of $3,000, vy « letter of that date. See a copy in | Note A, at the foot of this document. I bad great reasou to apprebeud that Mra. Forrest, | very discreet in mono: ‘uary 6, 1867, awakei attention to w possible uupleusantness Likely my ‘tw arise tn tho future, if any more money should be lent to her. It occurred | the day of final settlement in t | arrive, which seemed to be, and was quite near hand, she would, as ever, be needy; that, perhaps, she | woutd have no balance coming to her, and that, from her inattention and want of forethough’, she might | soffer a disappointment and might feel some chagrin. So I declined her application. But this pradential measure on my part wholly fatied of its ned effect. It actualy serrere ae evil sought to bo aveided. It diminished h lable balance when the final settlement of her suit did tuke place. On August 12, 1867, © bor- rowed $2,000 Irom a stranger, who, as ‘his whoic chance of repayment depended on the (to him) uncer- tain issues of a law suit, exacted a premium of $500, On November 20, 1868, she paid him $2,500 by the check of her attorney, Nelson Chase. This joan first came to my Knowledge subsequently to the latter dave, Sbortty after «be ovtamed this joan of August, .S67— to wit, on September 10, of the same year, losing eight of my pruvence for the moment, or intluenced by her iunportunity, or by some unremembered circumstance, | L made her another loan of $500. Her loiters on that occasion are copied below in the notes respectively marked B ana c, When Mrs. Forrest returned to New York from Eng- | latd to December, 1858 (Forrest cause, p. 564), Mr. Mevry Sedley and his wile, who was Me. Forrest's sister, accompanied her, and she has, I believe, resided Br "s house ever since, I do not remember n Mr. Sediey, eave once in June, 1859, when he made a short aifidavit tor Mrs. Forrest. (See the Forrest case, p. 673), [have no acquaimtance with nim nor do I remember baving bad any cor- respondence with him, except in the year 1869, as | hereimatter stated. I now proceed to the clo: scenes. On November 12, 1868, the business beins at an end, dir, Chase, as Mra, Forrest's attorney, received trom My. Forrest's agent for principal, tor the attorney's costa, on ac- count of interest, now for the sixth time compounded, avd for the ten per cent penalty imposed by the Court, $66,446 32 id two days afverward (November that when rrears suit should | 14, 1868) I recoipted to him for iny bill, $39,350 71, The only charges in my vill, except tor mut sent to Mra Forrest, or expended in her be were | $7,600 for fourteen years’ services to January 1, with interest thereon from that date to November 9, | 1968, ana $2.600 tor other and subse | without intercat. 1860, bad setticd an account with M the ‘money theretolore part out and tniercst previously accrued thereon; and I then took her obligation in writing to repay the sum total then dace on that accvunt, with thterest from that dute. After the judginent for alimony was Gnaliy affirmed in the Coart of tast resort on December 31, 1862, | charged | the $7,500 counsel went from that date until pay- ment im November, 1868, | charged interest on this sum. As she was receiving credit foany judg. | entered, not merely for interest, bat tor com- pound totereet on the fand from which payment of my | counsel foes could alone arise, aud as these fees were | due anu most of them ten or more | 1. thought, and I now ‘ pet od of simple interest absolutely anowectionable. 1 ve | ample proof thet at the time she, herscif, | thought so. I bave no reason even to suspect that she | | ever at ¥ moment of time thought differently. And On With this subject of interest tt will be iat, ainst yed | in com A | noted (bat noting in the way of compounding inter- ' further iu any business tor her. | by be | sequently y favor was ever made, unless it be in respect the advances made by me prior to June 2, 1860, The addition to my account produced by TH18 ONE VERY JUST AXD PROPER CHARGE was less than $1,430 Atout the 12th or idth of No- ‘vember, 1868, Mra. Forrest called at my office for about @ minute and inquired without eflect whether I could inform her where to tind Mr. Chase. Something in her er indicated that she wus introuble, The whole of my relations with ber passed before ™ 0 instant, as in a panorama; and, though J said nothing of the kiud, I then determined to act no 1 have not seen her time, My only subsequent correspondence ) singe that with ber is as lollows:—She wrote me a note, dated November 39, 1868, requesting me to aid ber in a legal roceeding contemplated by her. I replied that @ proposed step was inexpedient, and that, therefore, I could not advise or take part in it, On Maren 16, 18,9, she wrote me a note, protesting most vehemently against any sup- posal that she hag any part in the contemplated pro- ceedings by hor creditors hereinafter mentioned. On | March 31, 1860, she asked 4 me by letier to do some at- torney business fos her, as Mr. Chase had declined, , I declined the request, alleging one very suilicient rea- sou—i. ¢., that it was not in my line of practice In fact, | had nover acted as her attorney. It w.li be sven that 1 avoided giving a ueneral refusal to serve ber yn law business, and [ also avoided disclosing my reso- Juuon onthat head. She will probably now loara it tor the first time. Mra. Forrest never has, to my knowledge, down to the present hour complained to mf one of any charge mado by ma Ido voi belli that she ever has dono so. I never heard of her having dune ntil the pub- Heation of the article in the New Yor! Felerred to. the imputation therein con- tained, that she did sv complain, as equally «libel upon | her and opou me. From all other quurters my in- formation is thut her speech concerning me has veen uniformly kind toward me and expressive of gratitude to me. 1876, sho called at my house, which is twenty miles distant from’ her own, ond being unable to sce ine, ke mast emphutically im this very way to @ brother-m-law of mine, then stopping with me, ad who ws recvived all visitors. The ap- parent kiadness of feeling toward me then expressed must have been sincere. 1 believe her to be sincere always — But 1 was supposed to bo dysng, and she could not have expected any favor from me. | For about seven years we had no correspond- ence of any kind, “I have always asserted and now believe that Mrs. Forrest has ever been a lady of | periect moral purity, I lirmiy believe that she is of w kind dnd generous disposition aud quite incapablo ol falsehood. 1 am morally certain that she has uover uttered @ word of cvil concerning me aud that she will never do #0, Were she capable of such an outrage, after my minetcen years of arduous and farthtut service, which has only been nominally requited, | would regrot it tor her auke; but my means of repelling all imputations concerning my conduct iu her ailairs are so perfect that I could not rogret it on my own account. It became well known during the dtvorce case that Mrs. Forrest, in addition to her nu- merous attractions and accomplishwents, possessed great skill and talent as awriter, (Seo Forrest Case, pe. 201 to 206, 324 to $28.) it 18 supposed that she has cpt up @ connection with the press, and has contin- wally cultivated ber powers in ¢! respect. Con- sequently, some persons cannot reconcile her nce under these imputatious on me with tho igh character. which assert for her The task of doing $0 is not easy, but it may be possible, At first thougut that the society of her beloved sister, Mrs, Sedicy, and of that sister's only child, was so nec. essary to her happiness that the dread of losing it if she should interfere, might have induced her to rely on the defousive power ot my reputation, ar my ability to de- Taccepted this as ‘an adequate exeuse, | fend wysoif, but I was obliged to abandon the idea on learning that ber sister aud nivco were long dead, and, although stie ts‘ yet an Inmate of Mr. Sedley’s house, that he is married again, leaving unseverod bo tainily tie that ever existed between herself and bin,’ Stil, 1 eunnot doubt but that there ts sone: thing which coutrois her free agency. She is inca; ble of such am outrage as would be Involved in her giving a deliberate and free-will sanction to any charge against mo. On February 5, 1869, 1 received from Mr. Sediey a letter, of which a copy 1s annexe}, marked D, and soon after R was notil to me that some of the lady’s creditors were aboutto proceed agutust ber by wiw! are culled sapplomentary proceedings. This would have led to @ tull disclosure of all her payments to lawyers. It seemed to have been thought by som body that this woald be disagreeable to me, but 1 had nothing to conceal, and from the very first i- timation of this surt, nothing could have induced me— by loan, gilt or otherwise—to retuod anything, or | sie the slightest pecuniary benetit to Mrs. Forrest. would have deemed it an admission of somo fault on any part “Men not inaccessible to persuasion are sometimes restrained by an invincibie law of ther patpre. from ywiding the slightest ooucession to threats or force. No supplementary procecdings, or the like, wore ever instiiuted, and it may be proper to add that as 1 was not pleased with Mr. Sediey’s interposition 1 de- clined to vonfer with him. ‘What I might have done, on a personal request by Mrs, Forrost borsell fur a’ loan, or even a gilt, cannot be affirmed, but uy be conjectured. Waoen my bill for advauces, expenditures and services was receipted for in November, 1868, a gentleman stuod by who had rendered much aid in the case. I said wo lig, Times above | uring my recent illness, in the present year | the article in question pretends, that the ses vices of that lady's cone 8 ee ee itously, his omission to state that fact have been crimmal, The zealous, active and very hostile counsel for Mr. Forrest strictly cross-exam Mr. Noves, They never suggested or intimated such ap ilea. (See Eerap Diveree Onse, pp. 886 to 888 and pp. 1,010 to "The referee gave effect to this evidence, He actually gave Mrs. Forrest » pecuniary benetit in sel alimony, because of those a a indispensable for her to incur by (Forrest’s) resist- ance ue frm sah. (Saine case, pp. $28.) in tact Mrs. Forrest and evel knew well that 1 served her as coun Cy "eng terms, + ¢., to be paid for my counsel services. te ‘be ercee depended on results, She | able to pay anything. To be sure 1, ing ofthe matter, oa | else who knew anyt! evecytoty rice, and abe that she never could or would pay me proximating to a fair reward for my services, | never aid. abit ut all this is to the question in haed Neither when she first called on maser ab an otnes time did Mrs, Forrest ever say anything about hei inability to pay for professional oO course ‘it was assumed on her first call that Mr. Forrest would pay all the charges of counsel on both Sides for (ue services then conten; Whea, as 1! of anger, Mr. Forrest's plying io tho Pennsylvania for ad voree, revealed itself, I acted in op ton to hitn and | drew the Iady’s protest. When the Pennsylyanis Senators addressed me, | answered them, and veing iz the atfair 1 took some other steps designed to de! that application. It seemed to me to be most im, and most unjustifiable. Inull this [ acted mechanically, ‘and, ait were, from a mere impulse, & never dauned Mrs. Forrest, nor has it ever been my practice, either w ask for or receive money trom citen' be they rich or poor, until the completion of thar 4 | ness. Rurely, indeed, huve I ever received a dollar ip she whole . This is nota wise rect practice, but it has been mine. As 1 never ted from Mrs. Forrest payment for my servieos, her promises to that effect, which were frequent, wore, I believe, all in writing; indeed, 1 do not remember jody she ever spoke on the sudject to me or im my ing. i T will close with a brief referonce to the whetber I could have willingly permitted the rT | to suppose that 1 had volunteered to serve this gratulously, a3 counsel in her dispute’ with her husband. | ‘There was no legitimate ground on which 1 could | Justify or even excuse such an act. I had never had any prior acquaintaace with herself or any of ber kin- dred or friends. Suc was not conpected with me bj auy tie arisin, from a common nativity, race, tastes or pursuits, or from any cause whatever, stood in no need of éelat or business, and was averse to business of that kind. { then thought, have always derstood and now believe that ‘or a lawyer to offer wife Who bas disagreed with ber husband his voluntary ald in her litigations with him, and undertake to got her a divorce gratuitously, would be infimous conduct, Such a course on the part of the profession would be rogarded is dangerous to the peace of familie’, and any member of i an example of most destructive influ- ence. Had it b supposed that such was my relation to Mra, Forrest's case my conduct would have been condemned by those eminent and virtuous beads of famihes and patrons of sound morality, Daniel Lord, Robert Emmett, James W, Gerard, Wy | William Curtis Noyes, Marshall 8. Bidwell and many others now departed, whose names appear as donors on the silver presented to me, 1 do not refer to many others, because they are yet living. Mr, your honored president, ig one of them, Another consideratiun may be taken into view on this point. Mrs. Forrest was nota poor, aged pilow, | as some have suggested. She was iu no sense au object of mere charity. She was living in good strie, with an allowance from her rich busvand; she was y having reached only her thirty-first year; she was excellent health and radiant with sr her hasband roundly charged her with the grosses! Jasciviousness, and opinivn was quite divided as to the truth or falsehood of his charges. What would bave been said if it was supposed that I, a bachelor of forty-tive, bad intruded myseif inte this Jady’s quarrel with ber husband, and volun- | teered to become her chain; without fee | orreward? Surely the public and the profession would have deeply censured me. Wonld Ihave dared to ap- pear'beiore a Forpechable.jusy and advocated ber-caset Surely, during the long six weeks’ trial, Mr. Forrest and bis astute, eminent aad skillul cor the fate John Van Buren and Ogden Hoffman, would bave seen the awkwardness of my position, and availed themselves of it by invoking against my.client and self the most damnatory nections ut no such fase existed, and nothing of the kind was over ‘of. 5 have said nothing a gee. the motive of those who framed and published the article referred to, cause that question belongs ko apother forum. For a like reason I have abstained from expressing any in- dgnation against them. is another and = fiter place for the display of thut somtiment, New Youx, Aprit 11, 1876, CH. O'CONOR. HOME Panauany G | Sin—With » deep souse of the ‘the favor Jam | going to ask, and of the presuin) in asking what you have hitherto su generously et, Ae your eum pliance, should you see fit, would ‘ovation so much comfurt and avert such disaster to those with whom 1 am "You are no doubt in need, 1 am not; take as much of | Loui, that as you please.’’ He thereupon took as a loan $10,000. This sum exoveded all my compensation mn She controversy and all interest charged on it, Lt bave never received or even asked for one cent of this 15,000 Joan, principal or suterest. More than six years have clupsed since the loan was inade, and I gould not now recover it.” IT bavo, besides, Joaned or given, in several gums, thousands of dol- lars at a time to other persons whose sole claiin to my favor consisted iu tuoir iriendship to Mrs. Forrest or the tuterest manifested by them in her case during its ‘of at its close; und not one cent of these sums bas ever been returned or demanded, None of these acty Would justily me in making any pecuniary demand agamst Mrs. Forrest. To an accountng between herself and me they would not be relevant ut they are calculated to throw somo tight on the Qquestivn bow made before the public, i. «¢, whether [ ain extortionate or in any degree illiberal. Iam sure that my against Mrs. Forr for money paid ou ber account wero, through inadvertence, quite tn- ject. A very large umount must have been omit- ted, Since the publication of the articio in question Mr. Tsauc P. Martin. senior partner in the well known law firm of Martin & Smith, hus called one instance to my attention, Just befure and during the trialin 1852, Mr. Martin, whose activity im business is proverbial, periormed, with great zeal and earnestuess, most citi. cient and valuabie vices for Mrs, Furrest, expendin; his money in the course of thom OnJune 1, 1853, f paid that firm $200; and on January 24, 184, I further | paid them in fuil,’as tho balanca of theit account, $223 96. No charge was made against Mrs. Forrest for this expenditure. Until the present month (April, 1376), it was entirely forgaticn, Tt is suggested that the Forrest divorce case was in | Some way contributory to my success mn professional lite. Ido not believe it. Beiore seeing the lady I haa been for a quarter of a century a practistug counsellor 1m this city, My professional reputation was as good it has ever become, or ever deserved to be. It oe, death of many honored cuntempora- e8, au THR MODEST DEPERENCK OF MY ADLE JUNIORS, that have alone added to my relauve position, Were I to enumerate even a vortion of the noted acd most interesting cases in which | was employed | before { ever saw or heard of Mrs. Forrest it would seem a gasconade. If any one shall question this stavement it can readily be Verified on the proposed trial, Mt may further be remarked that emp.oyment _ wivorce.caavs is not beneficial to a lawyer in the a i then enjoyed. It actually repels the most provtable and advantageous practice. Ax above stated, I bad resolved years betore I took Mrs. For- Frést's retainer never to xeccept any more of such dusi- 38, ahd in her case alone has this resolution ever been departod from. As to mere élat, no doubt ler case arew to my name much of that unprofitable and troablesome accompaniment of human lie This, I think, was mainly due to Mr. Forrest's projession and his great popularny | with Gertaitt classes. Besides, 1 am unconscious of + having eter doue an act or umered a word in my whole Protessional life which was designed or intended to procure tng an ollice and The pieces ot hanging out atawyer’s Ite tin sign. jiver presented to me were accepted with feel! of gratitude jor the kind sentiments Gviuced by the dovors; but [do not remember ever to have beard and do not know who originated the design of presenting the compliment im cither case, 1 never sought, and all my Ife have endeavored to avoid, all such personal distinctiovs This ia well Known to all my acquuintances, and to all who wiih the slightest modicum of common sense have taken the trouvle to note or consider imy course and habits, I do not aga merit, but, quite the contrary, I re- as @ taut, for I know it arises trom mental le It is, however, a fact of some relevancy to the matter now in hand, and thereiore If state it. The assertion or miimation that [ volunteered or agreed to serve Mrs, Forro.t gratuitously or without compensation is utterly false. “The lady herself never for ® moment at any time woagined such a thing, This she will cortamly aumit; besides which the evidence that sho always expected, intended and repeatedly darmg the progress of the’ business promised 10 pay for iny services, 1s conclusive ia quality aud absolutely overwhelming in quantity, This charge bas, however, been put in another form. Reiying on the frailty of buman memory, and the cou- fusion facts which a lapse ‘ot twenty-five years tu some minds, the wrier of the article in question bas cotued the transparent falsehood that up to the time of the tria!, and when the compli- mentary presents were made to me T gave out, or in some way permitted the public to believe thar I bad volunteered to carry on the lady's case without coin. pensation. Of all the attempts ever made upon hans credulity, this would seem the most desperate, No one ever fancied such a tact, unless it be some un ‘Unnking readers who have receutly seca it alleged in howspapers. At the time of the (ransactions roierred ¥ could have (hongat so who Was not gross! tot buman affuirs and of the ideas copcermmng and professioual imorahty prevalent ii our community, Nor could i have willingly euftered such an opinion to get abroat unless | had taken leave of ny common sense, Tue presents of silver and accom- panying ceremonies are described in late Mr. Charles kudwards’ book “About Courts and Lawyers” (pp. 225 to 229), 1 can see nothing in them to excite such an idea as that | was acting tor Mra Forrest, oF ever acted for anybody gratuitous volunteer, 5 jam Curtis es, eminent counsellor most honorable and conscientious gentleman, was upon the lawyers’ piece of suver. Mr. Noyes was su- mined as a witness for Mrs. Forrest against her husband before Mr. Bradley, the referee, For the purpose of increasing the allowance to ber his testimony was ofiered to show what sie was bound to 1959. He fixed the sum at $7,000, giving the items to He well know that it was his duty to the whole truth Had he known, as even to aitrict employment, except open- | 18 engraven as such — uy her counsel for professional services m the case — down to the timo of that examination, & ¢, sane 30, prineipaliy to econousiea! man: condition, and it however. ‘an outstanding when he b exertions, mot. only iu writ mont, he hus brought it into # paying tel me, 4 moderate income. There | bt, with which it was burden unto ft, which heavily, and whie! ‘presses th alt his exertions, he has been unable to althongh 1 au: deeply taterested a, pad we, in ite fe me to bard, nr. bedles” Knglang, and this forms an shits very bold efort for our aseal eras : ‘That you w | fee may Ue the remae vende lication, 1 | and 1 teel likewise assurod that you oan bé | your generosity fe not inva 4 ~ tm enrbest a 1 oeayie sir, yours, with tu 5 2 To Cuaries O’Cono! “4 res trend Istanp, Sept. 10, (1867). al n to ow Nascent mast | hope that you will believe that Sane nace, avon met olan believe “Tnever: | from the truth in ‘ing you, that 3, will onthe , assurance that your generous aid, whieh a to refuse me now, shall not be pecaniarily invoked gain. ‘am very greatly in need of $500, which I could Prove te you ts for no extravayant or frivolous purpose, and I beg of | you to let me bave it, aed turther, to pardou my presu: | Vion tp asking:you to ald another to the many obligat! | tor waich I must ever stand your debtor, which no amount | of money cou! ¥, and which gratitude ty poor im acknowleaging. ‘esnean ng Mee ours with the highest re- | spect, and most sincercly obliged, CATHARINE N. SINCLAIR. he Round To Cnantxs O’Coxor, Lng Leng more An answor addressod to me at the office of | Table, 122 Nuasau street, will be safely and speedily deliv. raven Youans) Sept. 12 (1867). STATEN a Ie To Les O'CoNoR, one f eg most gratefully to acknowledge the check fur $00) which you so kindly seut m you my sincere thanks for the generous mai tt have conlerred the obi ir, yours, with the biz! the recelpt of and to offer ation which I nske *f I oon respect and wraiteds ” | CATHARINE N. SINCLAIR, | NOTE D. Private, &e. Feb. 5, 1869. Sin—I ask your patience for a brief hearing. I ask it with extreme roluctanes, and only becuuse it seems to me that you should be put in possession of cortain fete from @ trostworthy source. so that there may be no possible mia nderstanding respecting your knowledge of those facts here- aiter. | It “does not seem to mo possible that you eas realize the unfortunate situation to which my sister » Mrs. lair, is reduced ber seen inability to pay her deuty and stand clear of the world at time when, by remon of the successful tere mination of her lawsnit, ‘she expected, and by her ereattors Was expected, so to si iy at this moment purseed by three sueli creditors, one of wuom has resorted to supple- mentary proceedings, which are alse threatened by the oth- ers. Besieds this, to'save her annoyance aud in fall cout: dence of her ability on the end of her suit to reimburse me, ne of her obligations to an ex: jimall means and ai lt post. a rs. Sudley's reversion, am ehslf of her zi votally los to her. jotes made in my advauces some yours wo, and from time to time renewed, wre like- wise unsutisied. The amount, with interest, @ue to Mrs. Sedley nudmyself, and whieh, on tl of this actio we thoagit to have received, exereds $I ‘with sack ex ectations | entered into obligations myself unable und am compelled to little chanee of norable position as T have, . When Mes. Sinelal received whet did receive trom Me. Obae from the amount, from the billy piacod $19,000 out the 009, was by this in now Stooand $8000, ter pare of witch 00) and $8,000, for part of w! sir, Tam very well aware that all this does mot vase which, strictly speaking, Upon your attention, aed T lay i with great compunction and stand an as: regret, ow sure a thing it ts tome that, persoualiy, tavors of you! ae right ems to me se it know with ali thet acter to suppose we hear the that, without my sieterlednw's knowledge or sanction her sake 1 resolved to you w g's! statement of the truth. Mrs, Sinelair has made unhappy mistukes in this business, partiy through misealealation and partly through antore: seen contingencies. She was @ ehough to have for « larger balance to her credit on settling with her coum- 1. and ions of interest iy ‘tot allow for, Hence, in pertect quod faith, was led into maxing prom fe nae ane i ‘buop wotenable her to carry out, thns cruslly aggre Siting the humiliation of her position. ‘Sue states hee at the ancicipated of desired, however. was to be put clear | the worid, aud that sueb a result would have been al satisfactory to her. Ax matters stand she is threatened wi maxt distressing and imminent proceedings that mre i rally stimalated by the disapp: have been frequently assured of satisinetion whi should be ened, and Tan aiready so disastrowsly im in her behalf as to be of no possible present help to her. It is manifestly not unreasonable that people who helped her wi money to live when her alimony was not paid shoald ‘on the payment of arroarages thereof for reimbursement, ot sntehe an ag son were I to dwell, ax & con: nection of the lady's,on my profound appreelaton of your estimable services in the Lome and urdueus action now fi ) send you w letter containing the ine acknow! ent the omission might be misun- 5 ably a bit Bin Clair and tet iimnediace ternity ctrcte that’ the: termetantion but the sie ae With thie statement I close, T presi offer any sugzestion. to mak any sition ort ooulte faves ol tr j scented to mom daty to tay votore: you tie fasaa es to lay ‘you %0 88 i sure that kuew hing: to add, save that'l am, ait; your obedient’ MARLES O'CoNoR, Esq, &c., de. | m bent | ‘ & 4 ¢ Ai 4 ay a