The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-09-22
INpUGN CROKER CANCER GIFT
STEPC DREN SII 4 MILLION
OF 1T - THEIRS.
seek To set Aside Their Con, =, ance % the
Estate Their Mother Lett 20 Their
s,epfaIher on tho Ground mat TheO
Nere Induced by Fraud To Make 70.

The three stepchildren Of George
cracker who died of cancer last December
and lett property worth 81. SOooDo tn 80
tsbltsh a cancer research fund for Column
bta University. have brought suit tn set
aside a conveyance by them Of 81 .o00oo
worth Of this property TO their Stepfather
on tho ground that they were induced to
maze the deed by fraud. The plaintiffs
ar, Alexander II. Rutherford. Nlrs. Alice
IRVING and Mrs. Emma Rutherford
ksArny.
The property in question il the Croker
town house. az Fast Si1ty-fourth street.
With ell its contents. which was owned
Nv the plaintiffs mother. Mrs Emma
Hlnchett Croker. who had been Mrs
Rutherford before her marriage to MIR
CROKER This property was left to Mr.
Irr,k.r IN his wifes will for life. with
tho provision that upon his death or upon
hs ramarriage il should 90 to the three
plaintiffs.
IN" plaintiffs say that one ot the in
ducsments held out TO them as n con-
alteration for transferring their remainder
interest IN the town house to Mr.. Crock er
was a stipulation that he should leave
them SoOo.OOo each in his will. The
plaintiffs got only siOO each. They say
that they were induced To deed over the
property nv Mrs. Charles A. Childs. who
vas regarded by them as friendly to their
interesta Mrs. Childs. who il the wife
Of paint dealer at 22s Pearl street and
lives az - Fast Fifty-sixth street, got a
bequest 81 SlOOo 600 in the will.
The suit was before supreme Court
Justice Gavegan yesterday on a motion
hy the plaintiffs TO continue a temporary
injunction issued on August ~ restraining
the executors 81 the will until the deter
minaton Of the action from carrying out
an intention To sell the East sixty fourth
street property for $4,000 in order 90
turn the proceeds over to Columbia
University. The temporary restraining
Order also prevented the executors from
taxing any legal steps IN connection
with the property. but the plaintiffs
sgreed IN court to amend il 50 that the
executors may let the property for s77 500
for the coming season. The Court re-
seryed decision on the motion.
he plaintiffs say that their father
died IN March Ia. isa3, and that on June
H. 1894. their mother married George
Croker and they came to dwell with
their mother and their stepfather prac-
tIoaly in respect Of position and regard
a. the children OF George Crocker and
continued To dwell with him until about
the beginning of ipoS- They say they
took his advice and suggestion IN regard
~ the management OF their propertie.
and investments. and that he exhibited
acts Of the most tender and loving con
alteration toward them. and IN many
other ways wrought up IN ris stepchldren
feeling Of great confidence and strong
reliance and obtained over them a domi- I
tnNftanra1 and haf At a..
the transactions set forth betweentieorge
CrOCker and his stepChldren he had
acquired a mastery and domination over
their minds and affections and over their
Wis In matters whereupon he advised
than his will and reason were effective
IN overcoming and substituting their wills I
and reasons and IN this causing them 20 .
follow faithfully the advice by him suR-
g"-ted to them They say that such
reliance continued until u was totally
d"siroy~d upon the death Of George
IrOcker hy the PROVISIONS Of his will
concerning tho circumstances ~ tho
execution 81 the deNd Vhich the plaIntlf.
now SEEK 10 nulliiy they say that IN D"-
horn 10 Mrs KeaTny and she and her
husband were living AZ the Crockcr
home and Mrs kearny was Keeping
house for him Mr.. Crocker said h. was
disappointed with the disposition Mrs.
KAarny's mother had made 81 the house
tain the same. They say no told Mr.
kearny he would like to have tho prop
erty transferred 10 him and would give
the children each two or three times ~
much a. II would coat To buy a country
place. then proposed TO he purchased
by Mrs. kearny, which was tn coat siDo.-
OSH
= The plaintiffs say that when they werc
living in California their mother and Mr.
{ rocker were friendly with MIR and Mrs
harlaz A G'hflda and Altar h. u \
81 their mother this intimacy continued
during December. 1904 when the plain
'iTs exchanged visits with Mr.. and Mr.
Z hllds. They say that their stcpfather
sent Mrs. Childs IN them as an eInissary
- induce them TO give up their remain
der interest in the property and that
-ne told them AZ his agent that he would
give them $40 O0O 0ch To renouncc their
claim To- the town house. They say they
Considered that she vas authorized 10
make he Offer
on the argument ~ the case yesterday |,
counsel for tho executors insisted that
=" plaintiffs put ~ bond Of ST.. g0 to Il
'H."r any sum likely to be- recovered by
deprived 81 the proceeds Of tho property
d .r.nE the pendency Of the suit.
D" executors have power to sell Mr.
Z rs"rs country place AZ Darlington.
- apply the proceeds 20 tho Column
fa T"search fund. MIR. Crocker'- in
''.-s' IN cancer began when his vito
20 mother ~ the PLAINTIFF sought rc-
l"' from n without Suocess.
''"o-ga Croker was the youngest son
~ rsrl"s Crocker. who with Leland
" fr'0rd and Coils p. Huntington built
''~ ~os'h@rn Pacific Railroad. The ref
'.'r." n the complaint To Mr.. Crocker's
.''. instances az the zine he visited
''' iT'h"rforcis in san Francisco ron.
o." r- PROVISION ~ the will Of his father,
w. d'"'i in ISss. leaving n trust fund
sa- ~ 20 20 him provided h. could :
fr sober for Ave years. He had :
..'"'' wears IN which 70 satisfy tho exectI- I
re '-7' b" could do u. and M the time
"" rla -r'-i Nrs Rutherford be was liv. :
~ '' Z ranch trying to ~, the trust ,
'-'a'" Hn succeeded in 1874. but the .
r".' Ger he put s5dOOOO in the Arm ~
t..." We o-r1ick 4 90. and Ic-t heavily ;
'." firm faIied for sls.OO.0OO in :