The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1876-03-25
LEGAL.

r EGAL,-Hamilton County Common Pleas
~ Court Petition. Philippine Wagenfuehr.
plaintiff, against Ferdinand Wagenfuehr, de-
fendant. 4S,6l0 Said defendant, whose resi-
dence is unknown, will take notice. t'iat ON tho
18th day Of March. A. D., 1876, said plaintiR
filed her petition against him in said Court
for divorce, on the ground Of gross neglected
duty. Said cause will be for hearing at tho
June Term OF said Court, A. D., 1875.
PHILIPPINE 'WAGENFUEHR,
BY BEvAN q DOLE, her attorneys.
CINCINNATI, March %, 1876. ml25-6t.Ss
A DMINIsTkATOR'S SALE.-In pursuancs
n Of an order Of the Probate Court OF Ham,
ilton County, Ohio, will offer for sale, at pub
lie auction. on kIDAY. the 28th day Of April.
A. u. 1876. at O'Clock p. ~, upon the premi.
ate in the County of Hamilton ana State CT
Ohio, to-wit: "All that certain tract OF land
with the improvements thereon, situate in the
City Of Cincinnati, County OF Hamilton and
state & Of ohi9 ~ e. commencing at point on ths
seventy feetwest OF Linn street; thence SOUTH
wardiy parallel with Linn street forty-one
feet and six inches al feet 6 inches) TO south
west corner Of a lot now owned by above named
street fifteen 15) feet; thence northwardiy
parallel with Linn street forty feet and
six inches al feet Q inches) to Wade street:
thence east along the south line of Wad, strcet
fifteen 81 feet to the place sof beginning, and
being the same premises conveyed to the said
Frederick Naeher by John H. VIM. Hoeltro
and wife by deed recorded in Book No. 2v5,
page l09 Of the Records Of Hamilton County,
Ohio" Appraised at s., 200.
Terms OF Sale-0ne- half cash in hand, ana
one-half in one year from day of sale, with in
terest; the payment to be secured by mortgage
upon the premises sold:
JACOB PRYOR, Administrator
of August Boas. deceased.
A. j. JEssUP, Attorney for Administrator.
Cincinnati, March "a, A. D. ls,S. mh25-st.s
r EGAL.-Superior Court of Cincinnati, Ohio.
~ No. 32,44O.-Catherine Nj. Cook against
Euretta Gilpin,, William FL. Gilpin, her hus-
band; Francis B. Williams and Mary B. Will
Jams, his wife,. George I. Williams and -
Williams, his wife; Josephine Williams. Sarah
Heath, Andrew Heath, her husband; Mary
Covalt, q. Coyalt, her husband: Eurotta Swift,
der, and Eleanor Snider, his wife; CathcrinS
dian; William w. Rusk and sallic l.
Rusk, his wife; Lewis II. Rusk and yennia
Dayid 1. Rusk individually; oscoola EistuR
and Belle Elstun, his we; George w. Elstun.
and Salle A. Elstun, his wife; John Elstun
and Julia Elstun, his wife: Rebecca Elstun.
Rosetta Elstun, Angeline Elstun, Ann Eliza
hes &E sisffa fh5na xsh5aln an5
Ashburn, his wife; VIM. W. Ashburn and and
Rosanna Ashburn, his wife; Charles r.. Ash
burn and Sarah Ashburn, his wife; Chariotts
Penn and John D. Penn, her husband: Francis
L. Lilich, Hester Mary Carter, Rebecca A.
Swift. Samuel swift, her husband: Herman
Keller, George Mathers, John Boyle, James
Bulger
The above named defendants will take notics
that on the I'D day Of February, 1876, peti-.
tion was filed against them In the Superior
Court OF Cincinnati, Ohio, by the said Cathe-
rine NJ Cook and is now pending, wherein
SAID Catherine M. Cook demands partition OF
the following real estate, to wit: Lots num-
bered 3-and ., on plat Cof q subdivision made
in the partition Of a tract OF land in Section
No. ?, Township 3, and +. R: 2, in the Miami
in the south line Of the section
at the distance of A 26- 100 chains eass.
wardly from the section corner, thence north
Il deg. east 6chains to q corner, thence south
SO 1-5 deg. east 426-1OO chains to corner, south
Il deg. west CHAINS to the south section line,
and thence with the same north sok deg. we'd
49, l0O chains to tine place Of beginning, con-
tanning 3 4-100 acres. Lot No.9, beginning a.
the southwest corner OF lot No. 8, north 86N
deg west chains to a corner, thence north q
of the tract thence south 62k deg.
east 10 Ss-ioo chains to cor1icf,
the ic'S place s'. Of 6egianfing, containinr n,
4a-100 acres, more or less, and being two
Of tho lots which, among others, wers
tition IL case OF Francis b. Williams vs. bco.
y. Williams ct al. In the Supreme Court Il
Ohio at its May Term. le47, which proceedings
are recorded In volume 80, page 354 Of the REQ
ords Of the supreme Court Of OHIO, 10 Hamtltos
County, Ohio," and that at the next term a
said Court the said Cathcriao N. Cook Will aI-
ply for an order that partition may DO mada a.
said premises.
Dated this 7t1 day Of March, 1875.
JoRD0N, JORDAN q WILLIAMS,
mhll-ets Attorneys for PLAINTIFF