The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-03-06
TAINTED In COURT.
A L0velOrn Widow Caused Halt In
Proceedings.
Was Suing for Breach OF Promis,
From Merrill.

New York, March 6.-Under the fire of
a severe ross-examination, Mrs. Jessie
j.. Curry, handome widow of Bath
Beach, tainted upon the witness stand be-
fore Justice Stoyer, of the Supreme Court,
Brooklyn, while testifying in her own
behalf i'm her breach of promise suit
against Ezra Il. Merrill wealthy
septuagenarian of Coney Island
Mrs. Curry who is the mother of two
boys, alleges that while acting as cashier
in one of the defendants s roller coasters at
Coney Island MIR. Merrill made violent
love TO her and finally, In September 1895,
asked her To be his wife, only To jilt her
cruelty few weeks later after he had
become reconciled to his wife, from whom
he had obtained divorce some years be-
fore. Mrs. Curry swore that Mr. Merrill S
proposal TO her had been overheard by
Fred Stuart, IA young man employed on
the coaster, who was boarding with her
at the time.
The cross examination conducted by
Asa w. Tenney was mainly directed
against Mrs. Curry's alleged relations
with Stuart and other men. Mrs. Curry
admitted that she had introduced Stuart,
who had boarded with her for six years
as her brother, although he is no relation
10 her She insisted, however. that this
was done at Mr.. Merrills suggestion.
She denied positively that there had been
improper relations between Stuart and
herself
When Mr.. Tenney still pursued the sub
ject Mrs. Curry became hysterical, and
finally tainted on the witness stand.
The court had To be adorned before Mrs.
Curry could be restored To Consciousness.
Then the cross-examination was con-
tinued. Mrs. Curry denied that she had
ever slapped the face of her aged admirer
or had called him fool or miser In
fact, she said, she had never thought of
bringing this suit until Merrill had ac-
cused her two sons of having robbed him.
She admitted that she had attended
concert hall at Coney Island with one
Van Ness, and again with one Mooney,
but SAID that in each case Mr. Merrill and
her mother were in the party. She in
dignantly denied that she had ever stopped
at hotels with Michael Connor or pinch"
Phillips.
"You are poor, are you not, Mrs.
Curryg" asked Mr. Tenney. Yes" WAS
the answer
"You don't care for Merrlls money at
oil do you, Mrs. CurrygY asked Mr..
Tenney, ironically. "No, was the ready
answer II do not want his money, i
want vindication."
In redirect examination Mrs. Curry said
she did not believe that Mr.. Merrill is 77
years of age. The defendant smiled. He
certainly looks not more than 80.
ness stand she identified letter as one OF
a large number she had received from Mr.
Merrill The others she said, had all been
destroyed or lost. The letter was dated
Lancaster, y. H., Nov. ~, 1894, and was
addressed To MY dear friend. " Ii an
nounced the writer's anxiety TO return
"to the little girl whom he "had not
forgotten. IL was signed Ever your
true friend. By-by dear one to me.
EZRA F. MERRILL.
Fred Cronan, the adopted brother of
Mrs. Curry, then testified to convcrsn-
tion between the plaintiff and Mr. Mer-
rill shortly after he had discharged Mrs
Currys two boys. Mrs Curry had wound
up by asking him whether he intended to
marry her.
"No, you little" 2" Cronan said Mer-
rill had replied. "I'll never marry you.
You are not worthy 10 become my wife. "
Mrs. Eliza Flock, of New York. the
plaintiffs 5 mother, testified that Merrill
had been introduced to her in 1895 by her
daughter, as her intended husband. Will
liam Curry, the eighteen -ycar-old son, of
the plaintiff, testified that he had over
heard Mcrill's proposal to his mother and
had congratulated him
Fred Stuart, whose alleged relations
with Mrs. Curry played Ia leading part in
the widows cross-examination, and who
was employed on Merrills' coaster in 1S93
1894 and 1895, described the septuagenarian
as "a very ardent lover with his arm
nearly always around Mrs. Curry" He
too, overheard Merrills proposal
In cross examination he admitted that
while living with Mrs. Curry his room
was separated from that of the plaintiff
only by pair of porticncs.