The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-07-07
NOW SHE SUES MRS. LOWE.
xRs. CRCIKsHANR WANTS $4,000
rRoM THE oHURoH sIrGNR.

m. Alleges THAT Mn. Lowe. VINE ives TIE De-
rcspondsnt In the Diverco uuit which 1Eer
husband wants 60 Have Respenea. Alieu-
,ted the Anections or mr. Crunrnhauh.
IN. domestic troubles In the family Of Or.
william ]. Cruikshank Of Brooklyn have taken
another turn. Papers have been served in q suit
for $780, 900 damages begun by Mrs. Cruikshank
against Martha Dorlon Lowe for the alienation
Al tho Doctors affections. Mrs. Lowe 10 yery
we'll known in Brooklyn. She 10 the daughter Of
The late Sidney Dorlon of Fulton Market She
A quito prominent % q singer. She In regularly
sncsscd by one of the churches there. She
lives at present at sos Throop avenue. She
VA the correspondent In the suit for
divorce which Mrs. Cruikshank prosecuted
and won against her husband last year. This
net however. was known only to the friends Of
The Interested parties and to the referee and
counsel In the divorce case, for the testimony In
the suit was taken in private. and when the
decree Of divorce was granted with an order
for s15 a week alimony for Mrs. Cruikshank all
the testimony and all the papers In the suit were
sealed up by order Of the Court.
It was some weeks after the divorce had been
granted boioro the thing was generally known,
and then, owing TO tho prominence Of Or. Cruik-
shank. there was O mild sensation. But the
talk died out quickly. aud the affair was lmost
forgotten whom Mirabeau L. Towns, who had
taken DR.. Cruikshank's brothers place a. the
Doctors counsel. applied TO Supreme Court JUS
tce Dickey for leave to reopen the case. He
fltl a couple of hundred pages of afldavits,
which were to the effect that at the time the
suit was tried DR.. Cruikshank was suffering
from nervous prostration and other things, and
his mind was unbalanced, due to the worry that
cha auiN had cauna1 and ha had mot pra-
psnted tho defence that no was capable Of
presenting. The papers In this case were served
on Mira Cruikshnnk by her husband on Juno rs.
Henry Z. Frankonberg and Almet r. Latson adj
vised her that the court had no jurisdiction to
reopen the case. and wanted her to fight 1t on
that line. Mrs. Cruikshank insisted. however.
that all question Of Jurisdiction DO waived. She
said abe could not rest under the imputation
that she had taken advantage Of any illness on
have been in, in order to secure the divorce. She
died Just one afidavit in answer to the 200 pages
one typowrftten page. It was to the point. It
said, referring to the divorce suit:
this hTa dspd 5 b s' ss& With wsS sS@% osn sSe sn ssen af sss
guilt Of the defendant and that In the light Of
pieas OF Innocence contained In these moving
efidAvits as utterly. absolutely, and unQuali
upon any hearsay testimony whstsoeyer.s
with this anldavit before Justice Dickey. Mrs
to reopen the case as pr. cruifsSsaf wished
and on this motion the Justice made an order
HI HI. d Issn snd sh e e oF Dss sFi1 shs ss Bad b. d r 3ssSsS'
ordered that Nm; CEYik.haHk have permanent
u1 The p Da POI III IN A the suit for damages asains
M ses1.d a0 imns Sfsa fyA after IL Ehs a. oS SnSs for saf The Sf r
opening Of the case was granted. Mrs. Cruik
sSaa1 she ,1 woula s gave i L g him me In nH her complain
7 J, his case Mrs Crsikshsnk says:
eo rTaas the a Ssf'I sanssAiv Msr'a and pS Waaa! tsFs
PlaIntig did aanrdyss har % the semiHEt an!
destroy his affectlon for her, this plaintiff. and
i Il day day Of in june. 1885, - S.s and p ersss DtiSf th r. q
aperiod Of many months prior thereto, and O
days and times ' Since eth that ind day. WronesaIly
Tw!Sksdlyt and p%niustly debeuched 80. tie .st
Affection OF the said william J. Crqikshank 70
her. this piainti1. and for their said child. wa
Geprived Of tEo comfort. fellowship. society. ale
oruiEshanf. in her domestic affairs, and, IN
care. maintenance. and education Of her chile
stSslw tnas s aSu{ RIaihn sHs G Sad. s and hf has s sun se
plaintiff In the sum OF 100000
Mrs, loves answer TO these allegations wi
Be an absolute denial OF every charge. 1t no
not yet been filed.
Mrs. CruikshAnk's father. G. B. Foster. is
SerEeant of the park police In Brooklyn. II
said yesterday that DR.. Cruikshank had abuse
Bis wife for ten Sears before she applied for th
"Hs repeatedly threatened to take her chill
from her and plaeo tho baby where the motht
would never see IL again II abe ever undertoo
any legal proceedings against him; but it WI
only after she had witnessed his infdelity this
she went TO see her counsel and subsequent
came to me for advice and 20 AK me what
and secured the evidence which convicted Crui
shank and Mrs. Martha Dorlon Lowe, The ca,
did not 20 by default Of either defendant or g
respondent. Both were aware Of tho impendtr
divorce proceedings long before tho papers wei
"Dr. Cruikshank came TO me on Sunday. Jur
Fl, 90, and begged me to intercedo for him m
Induce his wife to return to him.. ! REFERS
him TO hor counsel, who. on that Sunday, Il
formed him In relation TO the divorce prooee
ness 70 his infdelity. 1t was some time aft,
Cruikshank. The secrecy In tho matter wi
wholly In the interest OF himself and his famil
and was observed at their earnest 9uppncatio
They also desired us to conhne our evidence
Wet, Repeated efforts were mHd0 by tho d
iendant and his friends to effect ayoconcIiatio
The Rev. Lindsay Parker called on mo in bis b
half, and stated that the defendant had 90
fessed his guilt TO him In every instance chare'
II the Complaint. but he hoped 70 30 able TO refor
back tho divorce proceedings and put the doct
end myself refused TO consider this propositio
Ny reasons were that I feared for her person