The New York herald., 1920-01-20
Mr.. CROKER WINS
IN PLEA To REOPEN
SONS THREE SUITS
One IS Libel Action, Which
Promises Sensation When
Called for Trial.

"uslSe LAWS, OF the supreme Court, has
granted, without reservation, the applica.
tion of Richard Croker. one-time chieftair
of Tammany Hall. 70 reopen defaults OF
judgments obtained against him by his
eldest son, Richard Croker, Jr. Two OF
the defaulted judgments are for si37. .1s1
and $0.Ols, representing sums claimed by
the plaintiff for services and disburse-
ments while acting as his fathers man.
ager Of property, and young Mr.. Croker's
share in the estate of his mother which
he said was tarned over by him to his
brother Howard with the assurance that
ne would be reimbursed by Mr.. Croker
senior.
The third default concerns libel actor
begun by Richard Croker, Jr. and
promises sensational developments wher
1t comes to trial. In discussing the man.
ner in which he alleges his father libellec
him, the plaintiff tells of his vain effor
to convince the aged leader of the error
of his views and makes known that g
similar appeal was made by Mrs. Richard
Croker, Jr., to her father-in-law and his
second wife. which also was spurned.
Young Mr.. Croker, opposing his fathers
fnOlloH, dSSeTleQ tIldL ne was INFORMED
that the retired leader had transferred al
of his estate in Ireland to his present Wife
Mrs. Bula Croker. Whether similar dis.
position was made of the Florida prop.
erty the plaintiff admits his lack OF
knowledge.
Wants to Examine Books.
Before the defaults We're reopened the
plaintiff urged the Court to impose as con-
ditions the examination of his father
before trial. inspection of his books and
papers, and that the judgments stand as
security.
MY father has made serious libellous
statements concerning me-" said the young
man. IT have been trying to convince him
Of the error committed, because / hoped he
would retract. ! want the action tried in
open court. because otherwise the defend
ant will not be heard, and there will be
no opportunity to prove the error into
which he has fallen"
Three extracts from letters supposed to
have been written by the defendant, upon
which the charges of libel are based, were
submitted to Justice Davis by Mr.. Croker
Jr. The first reads:-
II (Mr. Croker, Sr.) have found out that
he (meaning his SOM has been cheating
his old father all along"
Another Objectionable extract reads:-"l
have just had letter from Florence "a
daughter), and Richard is cheating her out
of her share. He sent her $500 a year
when she should get $4,000. He has full
charge of my bank account, and had no,
failed to draw literally upon it,
The third alleged libellous statement Is
as follows:-"I can see 1t all now. You
we're not satisfied until you and - mean
ing Justice Of the Supreme Court. con
spired against me and tied up this fund
T Slo nf fhinU-tbaf I liver
long enough to find you out. You have
been playing great game with my money
right along"
'swould Make Charge Ridiculous"
To the latter statement the plaintiff re-
piled in an affidavit
The Justice referred to in the letter Is
one Of the ablest and best known Judges
of this court. To mention his name would
be a complete refutation of the charge
that he ever conspired with anybody to
defraud the defendant, and, in addition
would make ridiculous the charges of the
defendant
Young Mr. Croker says he went to the
Democratic Club on the night previous to
his fathers departure from this country
for the purpose OF effecting an amicable
settlement After half an hours talk his
father told him he would not be bothered
any further, and then the son signalled
to a process server. who was In another
room, to serve the papers upon Mr.. Croker,
Sr.
MY father has never explained his
change of attitude toward me and his
children since his second marriage" con-
tinued the plaintiff. Nor has he ex-
planned his revocation of power OF at
torney to me-"
Mrs Mary 3. Croker. wife OF the plain
tiff. described visit OF hers TO the Savoy
Hotel on the day before her father-in-law
left for Europe. She had determined upon
this course, she said, only after her hus-
band. Howard and Ethel Croker had
failed to settle their differences with their
father in friendly manner. On this oc-
casion, she said, she saw Mrs. Croker, Sr..
who exclaimed
1--WE cannot be bothered any longer. We
must 60. Anyway. considering Mr..
Croker's influence, do you imagine his
son has any chance in court?'
To this Mrs. Croker. Jr., replied :-"I
know nothing about that. but 7 assume
that the cases will be tried on their mer-
its"
Both Mr. Croker. Sr.. and his wife deny
this colloquy ever took place. tho defend
ant charging that the affidavit OF his
was manufactured to
prejudice his application.
-