The Indianapolis sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1880-1904, 1885-03-28

lily hOcYttn naa 1CA iii " u oClh ~ III
Orphan Asylum. She asks that his wages
be restrained in the hands of the company
for which he works. and that on final hear
ing he be compelled TO contribute to her sap
port
In Judge Taylor's Court. yesterday morn
ing. Agnes Hashl fled q cross complaint
against William Haehl in the habeas corpus
case brought by him for possession OF the
children. She appeared in the case. but he
was not present. By her testimony 1t sp-
pesred that she had no means TO support the
children, and rat be was making from $40
TO S100 monthly. Upon the evidence Judge
found for the defendant in each case-that
is, be refused to grant the relief prayed for
by either Of the parties
Winfield s. Aldridge has filed suit for
SANDER against Charles S. Mcbride for cause,
alleging his employment at a former time by
defendant in selling and delivering meat
and collecting therefor; that in the presence
OF James W. Charles, Alphe1s and Austin
Kelly said: "Win Aldridge, while he was
in my employ, stole $3.50 from me-" Also
in the presence OF W. l. Pyle and D.. Ryan
deiandant charged the same things upon
him. The CONF lsint is in two paragraphs;
demand is made in each for - 600, and on
the entire complaint for $40 900 damages.
Ann and Thomas Russell nave filed suit
for damages against the city, alleging for
cause that they were owners OF lot 21 in out
lot I26, which is on the banks of Pogue's
Run and near the place where the canal
crosses the sfresm. The city at this point
placed a stone wall for a culvert in such
q position that when Pogue's Run was
full it run over the lot and cut a hole sixty
feet long, the foil Nidth of the lot. and eight
or ten feet deem. to the damage of plaintiffs
in the sum OF $500. that their stable and ite
contents we're washed away to their damage
$500 worth. Demand, $1,000.
The suit Of Thomas n. Borlsigh VS.. Squire
Feibleman and others, came up for trial yes.
tereay in Room 2. A Jury was empanellsd
and part Of the evidence heard, when q legal
point arose, and upon the decision OF the
court the plaintiff dismissed and withdrew
his papers. This was a suit in rsplevin and
for $1,000 damages. Burleigh was at the
State Fair last fall, running q confectionery
stand and restaurant At the conclusion of
the fair, he was sued by about
a dozen of his employees, who attached his
goods and took Judgment against him for
the full amount OF their claims. Execution
wac then Issued and his goods taken by the
Constable Claiming to have fled a schedule
ia q former case, BQrleigh asked for relief
under it. This being refused he filed the
suit which was yesterday dismissed. His at
torDey says it is to be relied.
Henry Krupp has filed suit agains. the
Stockmsn Ice Machine Company for
reformation OF a contract and for damages
for breach of contracts. Plaintiff lives in
Louisville, Ky. He charges that on the 14th
of November, 1882, he was brewing beer in
Louisville at the Shelby street brewery, at
which time he entered into contract with de.
PENDANT, the same by mistake being de-
scribed IS The Stockman Manufacturing
Company, under which he paid $40, 600 for
one of the ice refrigerating machines.
Plaintiff alleges that defendants have
broken the covenants OF the contract
in this, that the machine is
a total failure, and would not
work by reason Of a detective. ammonia
pump, ii not being fitted properly at the
joints, so that il failed to take away the an
moDia from the absorbent and by reason of
such failure caused the absorbent to burst
and put plaintiff to the expense OF purchas-
ing q new pump. The machine failed to
~coolsniDety barrels of beer as agreed, aud
plaintiff was without the use OF the machine
far three months, and be was compelled after
all to purchase ice as before for his purposes,
and was compelled to employ an extra force
of men by reason OF the failure of the ma
chine. Damages in the sum of $4,000 is
asked.