New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-08-25
CUNEO'S ACCUSER
TO SEEK SOLACE
AIDING SUFFRAGE
Miss de Won Says She's
Going to Give All Spare
Time to Work.
TO TESTIFY IN SUIT
BEFORE GRAND JURY
Counsel Asserts Magistrates
Court Was Used to Prejudice
ACTRESSES Case.

Miss Yvette De Won, held by Magis-
trate Corrigan for the grand jury on a
charge Of perjury in connection with
her $4,000 suit for breach of promise
against Andrew Cuneo, the Italian
banker, has turned her thoughts to
suffrage.
From now on" she said yesterday,
81 am a suffragst and will devote as
much time as can spare to the work
The court proceedings and the out
come of her case were Simply an out
rage" she said.
why, it is utterly beyond my COM
prehension," she continued, oblivious
of persons in the parlor of the Hotel
Brevoort, "to understand that here in a
country which is known as the land of
the free a person can be dragged to
court-and, in the first place, taken
from ones bed and arrested-on the
say-so of a man who has no grounds
whatever for the charge of perjury
against me. In Russia such things can
be understood, but here in America 1t
is almost beyond belief. ! never would
or could have believed it."
Miss De Von's large brown eyes
flashed as she told of her experiences
before the magistrate. She was dressed
in stunning white one-piece gown
which hung loosely about her graceful
figure.
al never had a chance to tell my
story in the magistrates court. but my
opportunity will come wnen the charge
of perjury comes up for hearing before
the grand jury. / have demanded OF
nv lawyer, John Reilly, that be heard
and | am informed that requisition will
be made to that august body to permit
me to stand before the twenty-three
men and tell them myself of the COM
plainant of the utterly groundless
charge made against me and OF the
high handed manner in which my case
was disposed Of The very idea of the
magistrate referring to hush money
and 'cold-blooded conspirators' and
shake downs when there was nothing
not the slightest bit Of evidence-to
prove this"
Describes $4,000" Incident.
Miss De Won declared that despite
the bankers gifts to her, which includ-
cd everything which money could buy,
he owed her money. On the witness
stand Mr.. Cuneo said that he bought
the actress many presents and fur
nished her with an apartment and that
he paid her 81, 500 for the return OF
his letters.
APE did not give me that amount OF
money for the letters" Miss De Won
asserted. "His friend came to me at
the Park Avenue Hotel, where ! was
living, and | gave him the bundle OF
letters. He offered me $4,000 from a
roll of 800 bills. He explained that
this was not for the letters; that 1t was
his money and not Mr.. Cuneo's. He
said I might need it and asked me to
BE a nice little girl and take 1t.
81 threw the money at his feet. He
picked it up and finally succeeded IN
forcing me to take it. | put the bills
in an envelope and gave it TO the hotel
clerk, who put it in the safe.
"a few days afterward Mr.. Ounce
came to the hotel, and | gave him the
envelope with the money in 1t. lie told
me that was foolish, anyway, to want
that amount of money; that | would
spend it foolishly and that | was too
Young to know how to take care OF
money. told him that was quite old
enough and that | would like it to start
a small bank account with. | trusted
him when he told me that he would
take good care of it for me and that
need not worry about it..
AT the time my mother died he told
her that he would take good care OF
me; he would pay for the completion
of nv education, and when | returned
from my studies abroad would make
me his wife. Why wouldn't trust the
man with whom had intended to share
my life?"
The money, Miss De Won said, was
never returned to her. This is the
ground upon which her second suit
against the Italian banker is based.
Mr.. Reilly seemed to share the belief
of his client that Magistrate Corrigan's
actions were an outrage. There was
nothing heard of this case" he said,
until the eve of my clients proceed
ings against Mr.. Cuneo in the Supreme
Court. | charge that it is an outrage
that a magistrates court be used to
preiudge the issue of this case"