The New York herald., 1877-02-09
Suit Against Nichols Of Connecticut
Divorce Suit Fame.
HIS wIFES BILL FOR DRY GOODS.
The Money Expended by General Sickles in
Raising the Excelsior Brigade.
TRICKS AND MANNERS OF WALL STREET

account In tho Marine Court yesterday, before
Judge Sinnott and jury, there came on lot riai
suit brought by tho firm OF Lord Taylor, OF this
city, against Mr. Nichols 10 recover $li7 so for dry
FOODS sold to Mrs Nichols. While recess has been
taken in The divorce suit the parties seem 10 be Keep
ing themselves familiar with jurisprudence in partc-
pating in modest proceedings in this CITY, IL is
perhaps, superhuous to repeat here that Mrs. Nichols
is dark Dyed, intelligent and attractive, and
her spouse bears tho irdicia OF keen
ahd dil,nent business man, who likes to
know when and whore his money goes. Accompany
ing Mrs. Nichols in court her daughter Lizzie OF
about ni.een and whose yachting dress formed part
or the subject OF litigation IL appears that in the
,arly part OF tho year 1875 Mrs. Nichols had an ac-
count at Lord TayIors, and ran up the bill on which
sutt was brought This was a short time before she
made her place vacant in her husbands household
After sho had gone and their domestic difficulties as
sumed the form OF open legal warfare, Mr. Nichols re-
fused to pay, the ground that the Dill was con-
tracted without his and that the goods
not necessary for his witc's His defence to tho
present suit tho same, he insisting that he had
given his wife sufficient money and paid bills sufficient
Tor all necessares for herself and Children and that
she had no need to incur this Indebtedness. Mrs
Nichols was produced rs witness ON behalf OF Inc
plaintiffs, and testified that the goods were necessary
ior the use OF herself children; that her hus-
band had knowledge that the goods had been
obtained. and made no particular objection; that
during six months in the years 1874 and 1878
yhe did not receive more than 500 from him Tor
slothng herself and children; that at the same
lime he claimed to have $500 900 IN ms business and
that his property worth $500 and what sho
bad purchased. she thought not inconsistent with
the wants Of herself and children and his means and
condition life she added that several occasions
yne had bundles of goods sent to her from other dry
goods which no ordered back One OF these was
ab OF stockings amounting to about 50, from Arnold
Constable l. Co., ana he met the boy and ordered
them returned. Mrs. Nichols did not explain
what style material these intercepted stockings
were, whether cotton. wool or silk, modern zebras
or moro ancient and substantial Balbriggans, but
from her II evident there we're tears In tho
hosrts II not in the eyes OF the females Of that house,
hold when the boy and his bundle receded from their
door, While Mrs. Nichols was the witness stand
counsel for Mr. Nichols made repeated Efforts to get
from her of the details Of tho divorce ease IN
Connecticut, with u view he said, 10 show bitter
lnitnosv her part toward her husband, out, with
the exception OF the iuct that divorce suit was pend
ing, the Judge ruled all testimony this point,
!aying he did not propose TO admit scandal into the
Thus anything new on that point II indeed any
thing could be told, was shut OF from
The eager ears of those present court The
second man on the jury was Edward L. Schessinger.
This may have been hs first effort as juror for he
did not much over twenty-0ne, was curly
headed, oily and round Dickens fat boy, but much
more wide awake. He seemed to know all about the
case IRON the beginning, and rolled uneasily IN his
chair each repeated effort of defendants counsel 10
get IN testimony which the Court was disposed 10
cludc When counsel wanted TO get ut the acs Of the
divorce care the purpose OF showing animosity
the OF Mrs. Nichols, the tat boys patience became
exhausted, and, gaucng hastily from Court to coun-
sol and back again. he said, 'I'd like to know what
her animosity has 10 do with his responsibility ?"
This question and the manner in which It was
Popoanded fnvulsed tue whole "Ssu. court IT, with s
JUDGES gavci, while the more aged and
discreet foreman nudgcd his youthful companion
To restrain his ardor, later IN the trial when, coun
Sol Tor Mr. Nichols got on the point as to whether his
client had supplied his wife libcrally to make
these purchases unnecessary the fat boy again woke
up to put a question. ''Aay be allowed" he said,
ssto ask WHETHER II pc had supplied her aDun-
dainty IL makes any difference in his responsibility"
II will that question by and by, said Judge
Snno.t as hc looked benignly the TAT boy, and
audience again smiled audiby. Her daughter Lizzie
corroboratcd Mrs. Nichols as to Mr.. Nichols having
seen a new dress her made out oil materials pur-
chased ut Lord Tay ors having asked her where It
purchased, and, being informed, made no objec'
tion.
Mr. Nichols testified that for some time prior to and
subsequent to the purchase Of the goods suit hc
had been accustomed 10 allow his wife about $500 a
month dress her elf and children and had vouchers
showing that within period OF about six months Of
bat time he had paid as much as 81 900 on bills OF
tnat character He denied that he had stalcu Ia his
wife that he had $500 600 business and his
properly worth half that sum, and asserted that
1t tnat time his property was not worth more than
Sal 0OO Upon this state oil afairs he considered the
bill IN suit unnecessary aud unauthorized
The evidence at last concluded, and counsel on
both sides clearing their throats Tor address
10 the jury, when Judge Sinnot suddenly concluded
bhe proceedings by announcing his intention to direct
verdict Tor tho plaintiffs. verdict was accordingly
directly for $l64 o. SO they sad all and the lat b0y
promptly arose, stretched himself and smiled approv-
ingly, at the same time informing the clerk that bo
thought the Jurors 10 have The extra allowance
instead OF the lawyers This is said be but out
of thirty ory similar suits which Mr.. Nichols has
been called upon to defend. promising lively ltgious
MALE AND FEMALE CONSPIRATORS.
There has been deposited with the Sheriff of this
county orders OF arrest against Henry A. Frost and
Margaret NJ. Krekeler, In suit for conspiracy and
malicious prosecution brought against them by Henry
w. Thaue, in which the latter seeks TO
damages These orders will not be difficult of
tion far the male defendant Is concerned, be
has long been inmate OF Ludlow Street Jail and ID
the custody of the Sheriff Frost has been regarded
as OF The curostics II not mysteries. of the legal
profession in this city. The suits to which he has
been personally party have been numerous, and that
in which he has been hitherto imprisoned brough,
against MIN to recover about 81, 0O0 which he is al
legged TO have fradulently converted to his use.
The circumstances out OF which the present suit has
grown seem to bear the hue OF doubtful personal
and professional integrity. In the month OF
April 1874, the codeicndant Of Frost appeared be-
fore Police Justice Morgan. Frost accom- panying as
her counsel and adviser and made charge against the
plaintin Of having ieloniousy stolen certain
rauty deed, purporting 10 have been executed and
acknowledged by himself on the 9th OF August, 1870,
10 Maria Stoddard to convey TO her the properly No.
lll East Eleventh street, and also certain deed from
Maria Stoddard to Margaret NJ. kTekeIer who made the
complaint. The arrest was made between ninc aud
ten O'Clock night and justice being accessible
that bour. plaintiff was compelled TO remain In the
station house until the forenoon OF the following day.
wuen he was brought before waving an
examn alton. gave bail IN 81 800 Frost and his client
still pursued the matter and obtained Indictment
against Thaule by the Grand Jury. AS soon as tho
facts of toe case were accessible to the Distnc,
Attorney, 1t became plain TO that officer
that they would not sustain conviction
and did not warrant an indictment, and
ne i'm medjately entered noIe prosequi When that
complaint was made Dy Margaret NJ krekeler plaintiff
in the present suit alleges she well knew tnat instead
81 having committed the theft OF the Deeds they were
sa by him and her to plaintiffs lawyer, the late
Judge stemmlcr, for inspection; that she went with
nm fpIant,f 10 the lawyers Office, and with con
sent they were detained there about three days. anc
that they we're thon returned to Mrs. Krekelcr This
"a several years before she made her crmina
co,npatnt against him before Judge Morgan aud Frost
well knew the dceds had never been knowingly exc
cntod Nv the paint but that the deed purpor,ing
be from pIaintlf to Maria soddard obtaned IRON
him (pIaintif by his Frosrs) raud ana mlsreprcsen
t.i,n, and be- tho said Frost, had been informed
had heard the plaintiff aud the defendant Krekclc