New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-11-01
THE WINANs DIVORCE SUIT.
MRS. oKEEFE WANTS A JURY TRIAL.

Mr., wINANs's COUNSEL ANXIOUS TO KEEP sCAN-
pALoUs STORIES FROM THE PUBLIC
' The frequently adjourned hearing OF the mo-
hon TO take the Winans divorce case from helereo
stephen r. Nash and place 1t before jury looA place.
Yesterday before Justice OGorman in the superior
Court Special Term Ex-Judge George NJ Curtis, VINO
with f. T. Gardner represents Mrs Ailcs heee' VI
Wiuans who claims TO he the wife OF Ross r. "lnans'
the son OF the Baltimore millionaire anu owner vi
estates In Scotland and who seeks to estDsu tuis cal
and to obtain an absolute divorce WIN tue lhc"eh'"i
concomitant o, large amony, stated that mis- client
ered In have the evidence already taken placed before
Jury and the case tried III open court lie re"u m
affidavit in which declared that her former counsel
ID NJ Porter when the first came in Tor trial DeioIe
Justice Ingraham and told her that there were 100
many young on the jury and he feared that they
would sympa,hize with Mr.. Winans. lie therefore
advised her to have the tried before referee ana
she told him do he pleased. She was Ignorant at
the time OF the that she would be called ON to pay
large sums for referees, stenographers and couuse
fees and unable TO do 40 and coud not even pay
retaining fee to her lawyer She did not know WHAT ncl
legal rights were, and declared that she was ene'
to have the tried by jury and asked 'ha' 'n O'
done.
Txuara Curtis argued that although there had been
M marriage ceremony there evidence Of con-
structve marriage and his client was entitled unuer inc
circumstances, to an order directing ina. 'ie
ts Se Sor s AND Mrs. waS wnnas could not
her Unconstitutional right by techucaty she dlu hot
knnw when she consented to reference that shc WIS
haItering away her constitutional rights lie "is leauS
70 proceed with the before "a jury uulns '"o
coming week. IL, .,. 20 ,his vos
Lanes C. Carter for Mr. Winans, said that II inns was
an ordinary case he would have nothing Ia say III epa
INT he was unable how any great coust a. =
question was nv Oved in this issue lhai thcIo ~ "
constitutional right 10 trial 10y jury I'D sucn , nI
Ali knew but it equally clear that that TILL go
he waived az had been done in this case y trlal III oe
conrt would involve the publication 0, s, vSe
matters VIII II was not desirable 10 lay peioF1 u
nnSiic IN ra was no why this case shon1 not
Trooeed before the referee. Mrs Okeeie ~ , I
determined to get money from Mr. Wih1hs. ier orno
went 10 Baltimore and lawyer OF TrumihennvVT ,
telling HIM that daughter intended 70 Dfiis % on
AGAINST Mr. Winars Tor seduction, claiming |oVVVo
domares The LAWYER Mr. Winans about tue may, S
and fhe result was that that sHit was never Oes.
Winans's father raid $4,000 TO settle IL, ol VIII
goo 600 v%nt 10 Mrs OKecfe and SlOOOO % hei
Ioti signing a full release and agreeing hot 70 @
Mr Wnans any more. Mr.. Winans first met ths Women
farteen years ago London, when o was an uue,
graduate at Cambridge. An intimacy arose fi p
,be, and she saws he promised to marry her lie ooh
hut ~ tie Continent and soon called home ny
his fathers illness. lie brought her TO New lork VIII" Ia
him and she says he PROMISED again 10 marry ner LA
married another and took husband Ills wiz anu
relatives were deeply interested IN tDs I NJ
There were other hearts 10 he made TO pieeu Ny tno
disclosures that would be maze In case iIko ts q" ~.
trial in public reference had been askcu I ~ so
other stde and Mr.. Wnans had agreel 10 go peIoo I"
referee for the purpose OF avoiding these disclosures
Ey-Judge Curtis replied, saying that MS cIieht MAJ
nothing 10 insisting upon her right u "Ju'
trial. The decision was reserved