Warren sheaf., 1892-12-01
FOR HER HONOR,
A California woman's Long stn,c.
gle to Prove Her Marriage.
Tor Forty Years sho Engages In Legal
Warfare and Mt the Age Of Sew
enty Is Still Determined
to Be Richted.

hlte-haired old lady, with bent
figure and sad worn face. gave the
outlines OF curious story before
Judge Hunt in San Francisco the other
day. She was over seventy years old
and she wanted d divorce, If she is
married, or what she calls '.justice" If
she is not married. Therein. says the
San francisco Examiner, lies the whole
point IN tho controversy she is making.
For forty years she has been struggling
to earn living and settle that disput-
ed point. Once the courts decided that
she was married, but by a freak of for
tune the Judgment was never entered
up, and by her victory she only offered
another ground for contest to the man
she calls her husband. Catherine Joys
was married to Thomas Joys in Killar-
ncy. Ireland, in April, 1912, SO the old
lady, Mrs. Joy, claimed to Judge Hunt
Nearly two years later son was born
to them. In 1647, five years after the
marriage. Joys suddenly disappeared
from Killarney. About the same time
one of the village beauties, Ann Cox,
also left her horne. Shortly afterward
everybody knew that joys had gone to
America. A little later he reached Cal
ifornia. After knocking about awhile
he settled in this city.
:. Mrs. Joys learned of his whereabouts
and followed him here as soon as she
could get money enough together
This was in 1859. She tried repeatedly
to have him recognize her, buS he stead
lastly refused, stoutly affirming that he
had never married her. She remained
near him, however, hoping against
hope that he would change his mind
and take her to his home. One day q
letter from Ireland brought her tidings
that her boy was dangerously sick. She
hurried to him and arrived only in time
to bestow parting blessing before he
died. Friends collected another purse
for her and she returned again to the
eruitless struggle of trying to gain
some sort of recognition from joys.
He would have nothing to do with her
and denied her all assistance. Mrs.
Joys earned what she could working
ont, getting help if she needed it from
friends who knew her story.
Meanwhile Joys had succeeded In
business and was accumulating nice
little property. Ann Cox, the while,
was living at 431 Hayes street. In 1873
joys thought his affairs in such fine
shape and his prospects so free from
disturbance that he married her. A lit
tie later Mrs. Joys No. brought suit
for divorce on the grounds of infdeli.
ty. The case was fought long and Bit
terly in the old district court. The
great point in the fight was to prove
her marriage to joys in Killarney. Mrs
joys won her suit and was declared to
be the legitimate wife of Joys She
was granted the divorce and Joys was
ordered to pay her twenty five hundred
dollars as her share of the community
property. She had alleged that Joys
was worth over twenty thousand dol
lars and detailed where the property
was located, but Joys swors that he
held the property in trust for Miss Cox.
At that time costs in a suit were very
heavy. The charges against Mrs. Joys
TO enter up this Judgment would have
been sor,cthing like one hundred and
thirty dollars. Joys fought hotly
against paying her q cent, and days
and weeks sped by while she was try
ing to get the money to enter the judg-
nent. It has never been entered to this
lay. Joys continued to live with his
hearts second choice. She died not
long ago, leaving him two grown
daughters and an estate valued at fifty
thousand dollars. One of the daugh-
ters brought suit against a local saw
ings bank not long ago to recover the
Eloney her mother had on deposit there
and which she claimed was her own.
Joys still lives on Hayes street and is in
very good circumstances He still We
hemcntly denies that he married Mrs.
Joys. A peculiar circumstance con-
nected with the present suit is the fact
that all the papers in the first suit re
Gently disappeared from the county
clerks Office three weeks ago, few
days after the second suit was fled.
Dust-covcrcd copies Of some of the
papers have been found in the Offices of
attorneys who worked in the FIRST case.
It was the disappearance of these
papers that caused delay in the hear
ing.