The morning call., 1893-12-21
is UNDISTURBED.
Mrs. KreIing Still Holds
the TiVOii.
= MANAGING IT'S AFFAIRS.
John Has Not Yet Proved His
Partnership.
HIS CLAIM TO BE ADJUSTED.
How Similar Complication in the
FamiIy's Affairs Was Arranged
by a Wedding.
HIS CLAIM TO BE ADJUSTED.

Mrs. Ernestine Kreing is still in posses
sion of the Tivoli Opera-house until such
time as it shall be legally decided whether
or not John and f. w. Kreling were CO.
partners in the business with her deceased
husband.
As soon as Presiding Judge Sanderson
had taken his seat on the bench yesterday
morning John KreliDg, accompanied by his
attorneys, Herbert Choynski and j. d.
Sullivan, appeared in court with a motion
to dissolve the injunction recently granted
to Mrs. Kreling restraining John Kreling
from interfering with the management of
the Tivoli Opera-house. A contin uance.
however, was obtained until the afternoon
in order to secure the attendance of Mrs
Kreling, who was engaged at the ceme-
terry in removing her husbands coffin 10
the vault prepared for it. There was some
objection to the proposed continuance, but
Judge Sanders0n peremptOrily settled
the point.
In the afternoon Mrs. kreling appeared
in court attended by her attorney. Fl. II.
Lowenthal, and by Attorney FreideDrich,
who has been engaged as special counsel
for Mrs. kTeling.
Herbert Choynski at once moved to dis
solve the injunction on the ground that
lSzg x,
ther, was a bona-6de partner with the de-
ceased William kreling in the enterprise
known as the TiyOh Opera-house, and that
in consequence of William Kreling's death
John and T. w KrelinE are the sole sur
viEing partners. and as such are entitled to
take the TeinS of management into their
own hands.
1t was c0ntended by Mr.. Choynski that
although the lease of the "TiFolP' was
made out in the name of William Kreling.
yet that the partnership was well known
anG understood, and that William Kreling
held the lease in trust for the copartner-
ship. The Opera-house was erected in
1879 by the four krelings-William, John,
Joseph (now dead and Z. w. kreling.
their father. 1t was always known and
advertised under the title of "Tivoii
Opera-hOuse, kreling Bros. proprietors
and managers.
In support of this contention Mr..
ChOynski read number of affidavits, in
which the several atlantis all deposed that
they had known of the existence of part
nership for several years. These were
the affidavits of John Kreling, F. w.
Kreling, Martin Kreling (another brother);
S. j. Farrell. justices Court clerk: ex-
Supervisor David Barry, king" Nc
Manus, A. Wertheim. William A. Edgar,
Joseph Seheerer, ex-County Clerk Will
liam j. Blattner, Justice of the Peace
Frank j. Gray, 81. c. Rosenthal, L. c.
himself. In addition to these the record
was produced of an action brought by
William Kreing ct al. vs.. George Morgan
ct al, dispute over the production of
some operas, In which William Kreling
speaks of John and f. w. Kreling as his
associates in the operate business.
Mrs. kreliug's attorneys asked for
continuance to enable them to prepare re-
plies to all these affidavits, but Judge
Sandersop refused to grant it, remsrkng
that Mrs. Kreling was in court. and that
he would like to hear what she had to say.
So Mrs. Kreling was called TO the stand,
and testified that she had for years known
all that went oD IN the Tivoli, and she
knew that her late husband was the sole
proprietor. John Krsling's interest in
the business terminated on May u, 1886.
Since then he had had no official capacity
of any kind in the conduct of the
OPERA house. In reply to Judge Sander
sons questions Mrs. Krelng said that
she intended TO reopen the theater on
Saturday night, and that she would
same executive, the same everything
would remain as before her husbands S
death.
In cross-examination j. d. Sullivan
asked how it was on the advertisement of
the Tivoli ap,,, earen the announcement
-'Krelng Bros" How was that?
On" replied Mrs. Kreling, "That re-
fers to the time when my first husband,
Joseph Kreling. and my late husband.
William, were in partnership together.
My second husband, William Kreling,
would never have the name altered. That
had and has nothing to do with either
John OF F. W. Kreling."
Mr. Sullivan attempted to show that
when Joseph Kreling died his widow tried
to do the same thing with William as she
was now doing with John, namely. dis
pute his interest in the business Judge
Sanderson, however. ruled this out as
irrelevant.
Finally the Judge decided that be could
not under the circumstances disturb the
injunction. He said that in his opinion
John kreling's lawyers were wasting
time IN a proceeding of that kind. Their