The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1894-03-08
Police Officials Reckless
Statements Unjustly In
volVe a Young Lady.
MRS. VAN BEUREN's DENIAL.
She Found an Entirely Different
Person Talking to Her Hus- S,.
banda Complete Ex-
oneratiOn.

Through a mistake of identity, for which
the police officials of the Fourth precinct
station house are responsible, the name of
Miss Carrie Chesley of Clinton avenue was
involved in very unpleasant way yester-
day in the story of an occurrence which took
place on jackson avenue, the previous even
ing. The story was given publicity in the
columns of THE NEWS as the police told it.
The story alluded to was that of the angry
dispute which took place between Policeman
Thomas Van Beuren, his wife, Mrs. Anna
Van Beuren and young lady over the con-
versations which, it was alleged took place
with frequency between the young lady and
the officer The assertion was made that
Miss Chesley was the third party to the
dispute. The statement proves to have been
a most regretable error. There is conclusive
proof that Miss Chesley was not the person
involved in the discussion with Mrs. Van
Beuren. She was not present during the in
cident, and she was in no way whatever in
volved or concerned in it. There is also
proof that she was not, as the police yester-
day alleged, involved in any way in some
what similar encounter with Mrs. Van
Beuren, some months ago.
Among other important items in the
evidence which exonerates Miss Chesley, is
the statement of Mrs Van Beuren herself,
made this morning to a reporter OF The
NEWS. She said
MRS. VAN BEUREN'S STATEMENT.
81 was told by parties that my husband
was talking occasionally to a young lady on
jackson avenue, but didn't bother about it
for quite while. The other night, when
had a little time to spare, went down to
find him. When l got to jackson avenue
found my husband there and he was deeply
interested in conversation with young
lady.
''I caught her by her two shoulders. She
was short and thin, and had light hair L
asked her If she was aware that that was my
children? She said she didn't know that he
was married She asked me to let her go
and promised me she wouldn't talk to him
any more She admitted that she had spoken
to him frequently gave her a good shak-
ing, and told her to go. know Miss Chesley
and she certainly was not the person., !
found with my husband. They are as unlike
as they could possibly be- | never heard
any remarks in connection with Miss Chesley
and nv husband. | never waited for nights
and gave horsewhipping to anybody as 1t
has been stated. I never in my life spoke
TO Miss Chesley before last night, when she
called on me to speak about the puDnsned
statement have no reason to suspect any
infatuation on either side for the one on the
other.n
MIR. CHEsLEY's STATEMENT.
Mr.. w. P. Chesley, father of Miss Chesley,
was also seen, and he was thoroughly in
dignant that rumor had connected his
daughters name with the incident I'm
mediately he heard that the statement was
made public, he, with Miss Chesley, visited
Mrs. Van Beuren That lady at once de-
clared that she, Miss Chesley, was not the
person she surprised with her husband:
ssIn further proof Mr.. Chesley said to a
NEWS reporter, "that my daughter had
nothing whatever to do with this disgraceful
story, was home on Tuesday evening when
that scene is alleged to have taken place, and
know positively that my daughter was in
the house all the evening. She was with me
in the same room. Several other persons
testify to this"