davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

any other point in the Union. This is a
mistake. There are several points where
there is a much larger number. AT Boston.
for instance, in one OF Its union stations,
about as many trains arrive and depart
daily, and there are three 0tner stations
where a large number OF trains are handled.
ST. Louis. is another point where certainly
a much larger number or through passenger
trains are handled.
Erie & Western, says he is satisfied tfat
the east-bound lines out of Chicago and
Peoria are strictly adhering to rates. and
that business will Increase, which will give
more stability to rate matters all round. He
thinks II would be unwise for any traffic
manager TO trife with rate matters at pres
ent. so strong is the movement to bring
The Lake Erie x Western belongs 10 no as
ISOLATION, but Is living strictly up 10 tariff
rates, and this statement OF Traffic Mana
ger Parker Is confirmed by officials OF COM
peting lines.
On Sunday the Lake Erie a. Western took
out OF Indianapolis two theatrical troupes-
the Pctter-Bellew Company ana the Amer
lean Vaudeville company-the first for SYRIA
cuse and the latter for Albany, y. ", turn
at Fostoria. Unfortunately for the Lake
Erie & Western it's train did not reaca Fos-
tcria In time 10 connect with the Nickel
plate fast train. and both t.oupeS failed 10
reach their destination in time f0- the Mon
day evening performances at the respective
cities. IL Is stated that the Potter-Beilew
Company will demand damages from the
tract. Usually, in such cases as this, a trunk
line will wait for a connection when II Is
late a half hour or so, but In this case the
Nickei-plate did not
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State of Indiana. Marion county, S. In
the Superior Court of Marion county, in
the State OF Indiana.
Leander A..Fulmer ct al. vs.. T. c. Ger
no. $3.50. Complaint to foreclose improve
ment lien.
Be il known that on the 7th day of jan
their attorneys, filed In the office of the
clerk OF the Superior Court of Marion coun-
~. in the State OF Indiana, their com
plant against the above named defend
ants. and the said plaintiffs having also
filed IN said clerks Office the affidavit of a
competent person showing that said defend
ants. II. G.. Gerlaca and - Gerlack, his
wife, are not residents of the State of In
diana that said action is to enforce a lien
upon real estate In Marion county for pub
lie improvements In the city of Indianapo-
parties thereto: and. whereas, said plant
IFS having by Endorsement on said COM
plant required said defendants TO appear
I'm said court and answer or demur thereto
on the 30th day OF March, 1896;
Now. therefore, by order of said court,
said defendants last above named are here
by notified OF the fling and tendency of
said complaint against them, and that I'M
less they appear and answer or demur
thereto at the calling Of said cause on the
3oth day OF March. 1896. the same being the
to be begun and held at the courthouse In
the city OF Indianapolis on the first Monday
in March. 1896. said complaint and the mat
tiers and. things therein contained and al
legged will be heard and determined in their
absence. JAMES W. FESLER, Clerk.
Clifford, Browder & Moffett. Attorneys for
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21


state OF Indiana, Marion county. IS. In
the Superior Court of Marion County, in
the State OF Indiana.
Leander a. Fulmer CT al. VS.. Cecilia Bur-
rus ct al.
No. $500 Complaint to foreclose i'm
provement lien.
BE 1t known, that on the 81 day of De-
cemner. 1885. the above named plaintiffs.
oy their attorneys. fled in the office OF
the clerk OF the Superior Court OF Marion
county. in the State OF Indiana. their com
plant against the above-named defendants,
and the said plaintiffs having also nled IN
said clerks Office the affidavit of a compe-
tent person. showing that said defendants:
Cecilia Burrus. Peariie VI. Abrams ano
Perry A Abrams. are not residents OF the
State OF Indiana; that said action Is 10
county for public improvements in the city
or Indianapolis, and the said defendants
are necessary parties thereto, and whereas
said plaintiffs having by Endorsement on
said complaint required said defendants to
appear in said court and answer or demur
thereto on the Both day OF March, 1896;
Now, therefore, Wy order of said court,
hereby notified OF the filing and tendency
Of said complaint against them. and that
unless they appear and answer or demur
therto, at the calling of said cause, on the
Goth day Of March. 1896. the same being
the ~twenty-ffth judicial day OF a term OF
said court to be begun and held at the
courthouse in the city OF indianapolis on
the first Monday in March. 1896. said COM
plant and the matters and things therein
Contained and alleged Will be heard and
determined in their absence.
JAMES ". FESLER, Clerk.
clifford & Browder. Attorneys for PLAIN
tifs.
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21
A SYMPHONY In BROWN.
So One Enthusiast Described Mrs,
Ewing's CrOquette.

The ladies of the cooking class yesterday
were instructed by Mrs. Ewing in the prop
er way to make. form and fry chicken GRO
quettes, which, when lifted from the hot
fat in the wire basket. were, as one lady
said, "a symphony in Blown" Then Mrs.
Ewing told how to make Goldfish balls and
cook them. When Goldfish balls, croquettes
and like dishes. which are fried, fall to
pieces, it is either because the fat is not
hot enough, or the material is too rich or
too moist. One of the interesting parts of
the lesson was the recounting of a dinner
which was given by the Chautauqua cooking
class 10 Bishop Vincent and others. The
courses were clear soup. broiled Lake Chau-
tauqua pickerell, with scooped potatoes
same as taught Wednesday, and sliced GU
cumber, with French dressing; roast lamb.
with mint sauce. peas, and a vegetable:
salad. vita cheese straws and sailed al
mcRds. The dessert was lovely, and cost
just one and a half cents apiece around"
said Mrs. Ewing. 1T was made of gelatine,
sugar and fresh strawberries. and was
served in a bed of whipped cream. with
angel food At this same dinner the five
were Instructed TO keep the bread and but
ter plate supplied with breadsticks and sec
lions of bread, and In this way one college
professor ate I'VE SECTIONS or DledI, which
showed the economy of having good bread.
Timbales, which, "a most people know,
are receptacles for the serving of creamed
foods, and which can he eaten, were the
subject for a part OF the lesson. The rec
ipe was one-half cup of flour, one-fourth
Dup OF milk, water or cream. one egg. a
pinch of salt. and when mixed beaten with
a Dover beater. The timbale iron was
dipped into the batter and then put in the
hot fat. When of a light brown color the
little cup dropped eff easily. One particu-
larry good hint given was: For anything
you fry which is in danger of soaking grease,
mix in an unbeaten egg" Mrs. Ewing made
delicious orange ~fritters.
Last evening an extra chatting dish lesson
was given, and among the dishes taught
was Welsh rarebit. There has been some
curiosity about the way in which Mrs.
Ewing would spell and pronounce the name
OF this dish, which, 10 many minds. is al
most synonymous with chatting dish. Mrs.
Ewing was asked about IL, and she says it
for In the time in which 1T originated il
was a rare bit, and anything else is only
a degeneration of the original word. She
also showed how TO concoct sorti oysters.
cream lobster, mock terrapin, and cook
breakfast bacon and other things. The les
son was attentively listened 10 by a class
of about sixty, and many notes were taken.
Not a few of the class were men, VINO
wanted 10 learn now 10 gracefully work
with the dish and make things too good
10 eat" for their friends at little informal
gatherings. or when they go to visit. The
lesson this afternoon will be Delicate
Desserts" An extra lesson will be given
Monday, at 2:3o. on "Cakemaking."
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State OF Indiana. Marion county. SIS. In
the Superior Court of Marion county, IN
the State OF Indiana.
Leander A. FuImer et al. Va. Robert +. r.
Albeit ct al.
No. 51s49. Complaint to foreelose improve
ment lien.
BE IL known that on the eth day OF jan
uary, 1896. the above named plainti1s, Dy
their attorneys. filed in the office or the
clerk of the Superior Ccirt OF Marion coun-
IL, In the State of Indiana, their complaint
against the above named defendants, ana
the said plaintiffs having also nled IN SAID
clerks Office the afsidavit OF a. competent
person showing thai said defendants. Rod
ert r. r. Albeit n - Albeit, his wife,
are not residents OF the State of Indiana;
that said action Is 10 enforce a lien upon
real estate in Marion county FOR pubic I'M
provements in the city of Indianapolis, ana
the said defendants are necessary parties
thereto; and, whereas, said plaintiffs nav
ing by Endorsement on said complaint re-
quired said defendants TO appear In SAID
court and answer or demur thereto on the
10Th day of March. 1896;
Now. therefore. by order OF SAID court,
said defendants last above named are mere
by notified OF the fling and tendency or
said complaint against them ana that un-
less they appear and answer or demur
thereto at the calling OF said cause on the
10Th day OF March, 1896, the same being the
18th judicial day of a term of said court TO
be begun and held at the courthouse In the
city OF Indianapolis on the first Monday IN
March, 1896, said complaint and the mat
ters and things therein contained. n a.
legged will be heard and determined In their
absence. JAMES w. FESLER, Clerk.
Clifford. Browder & Moffett. Attorneys for
Plaintiffs
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State Of Indiana. Marion County. 81. In
the Superior Court OF Marion County in the
state OF Indiana
Lesnder A. Fulmer ct al vs.. Elizabeth c.
Reader ct al.
No. slsls Complaint TO forecIOse improve
ment lien
Be II known, that on the 4th day of Janu-
AIRY, 1896, the above named plaintiffs, Dy
their attorneys. fled In the office OF the
county. in the State Of Indiana, their COM
plant against the above named defendants,
and the said plaintiffs. having also nled IN
said Clerks office the affidavit or a com
petent person. showing that said defendants,
Elizabeth G.. Reader ard - Reader, ner
husband, are not residents or the state OF
Indiana; that said action Is 10 enforce a
lien upon real estate in Marion county Tor
public improvements In the city or Indi-
annapolis. and the said defendants are neces-
sary parties thereto. and whereas said
complaint required said defendants TO APP
pear IN said court. and answer or demur
thereto, on the Both day OF March. 1895;
Now therefore, by order or said court,
said defendants last above named are here
ny notified Of the filing and tendency. OF
said complaint against them. and that unless
they appear and answer or demur thereto,
at the calling OF said cause on the Jctn DAY
OF March, 1896, the same being the 10Th
judicial day OF a term OF said court 10 De
begun and held at the courthouse In the
March, 1896. said complaint and the matters
and things therein contained and alleged.
will be heard and determined IN tnelf ao-
sencs. JAMES w. clerk.
Clifford. BFowder & Moffett. Attorneys FOR
Plaintiffs
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State of Indiana, Marion county, 50. In
the Superior Court OF Marion county, IN
the State Of Indiana.
Leander A. Fulmer ct al. VS.. cara l..
McCurdy ct al.
No. 5iss7. Complaint to foreelose improve
ment lien.
Be it known, that on the eth day OF jan
uary, 1896. the above-named plaintifrs, Dy
their attorneys, fled in the office OF the
clerk OF the Superior Court OF Marion coun-
~, in the State OF Indiana, their complaint
against the above-named defendants, and the
said plaintiffs having also nled In said
clerks Office the affidavit OF a competent
person, showing that said defendants, Cara
T. McCurdy and William III. McCurdy,
State OF Indiana: that said action Is TO fore
close a lien upon real estate in Marion coun-
ty for public Improvement in the city OF
Indianapolis and the said defendants are
necessary parties thereto. and whereas said
plaintiffs having, by endorsements on SAID
complaint, required said defendants 10 APP
pear In said court and answer or demur
thereto on the 9Th day OF March. 1896;
Now, therefore, by order or SAID court,
said defendants last above named are here
BY notified of the fling and tendency OF
said complaint against them, and that I'M
less they appear and answer or demur tneTe-
to at the calling OF said cause on the 3Oth
day of March, 1886, the same being the
18th judicial day of a term of said court TO
be begun and held at the courthouse IN
the city of Indianapolis on the first Monday
tiers and things therein contained and al
legged, will be heard and determined in
JAMES w. FESLER, Clerk.
Clifford, Browder & Moffett, Attorneys
for Plaintiffs.
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State OF Indiana, Marion county SIS: In
the superior Court OF Marion county, in
the State of Indiana.
Leander n. Fulmer 81 al. VS.. Margaret
Campbell ct al.
No. 5l62O. Complaint TO foreclose i'm
provement lien.
BE it known that on the 4th day of jan
nary, 1896, the abOve-named plaintiffs, by
their attorneys. filed in the Office of the
clerk of the Superior Court of Marion
county. In the State of Indiana, their COM
plant against the above-named defend
ants. and the said plaintiffs having also
filed in said clerks office the affidavit of
a competent person. showing that said de-
PENDANTS. Margaret Campbell and -
Campbell. her husband, are not residents
of the State of Indiana: that said action
Is to enforce a lien upon real estate i'm
Marion county for public improvements In
the city of indianapolis. and the said de-
PENDANTS are necessary parties thereto;
and whereas said plaintiffs. having by in
defendants to appear in said court. and
answer or demur thereto, on the 30th day
of March. 1896;
Now, therefore, by order of said court.
said defendants last above named are
hereby notified of the filing and tendency
OF said complaint against them, and that,
unless they appear and answer or demur
thereto, at the calling of said cause ON
the 30th day of Marcn, 1896, the same being
the 18th judicial day of a term of said
court to be begun and held at the court
house in the city OF Indianapolis. on the
first Monday in March, 1896, said complaint
and the matters and things therein con-
tanned and alleged, will be heard and de-
termined I'm their absence.
JAMES w. FESLER. Clerk.
Clifford. Browder * Moffett. Attorneys
for Plaintiffs.
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

In the Circuit Court of Marion county.
Indiana March term, 1895.
Theresa Levy. executrix of estate OF
Reuben Levy. deceased, VS. Dave r. Levy.
TO Dav r. Levy, Edward !. Levy:
fo1 are severally hereby notified that the
:, ove-named petitioner. as executrix of the
<5tats aforesaid, has filed in the Circuit
Court or Marion county, Indiana, a petit
<ion. making you defendants thereto: and
praying therein for an order and decree
Of said court authorizing the sale OF certain
real estate belonging TO the estate Of said
decedent and in said petition described. to
make assets for the payment or the debts
and liabilities OF said estate; and has also
dled m affidavit averring therein that YOU
and each OF you are nonresidents OF the
state OF Indiana or that your residence is
unknown and that you are necessary parties
10 said proceedings. and that said petition.
50 fled and which Is now pending, Is set
FOR hearing in said Circuit Court at the
courthouse in Indianapolis, Ind on the 18th
day OF Marc1, 1896
Witness the clerk and seal OF said court
this Eth day OF February 1886.
n. 81 JAMES w. FESLER.
Clerk Marion Circuit Court.
Smith & Korbly. Attorneys
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State OF Indiana, Marion county,, SIS. In
the Superior Court of Marion county, IN
the State OF Indiana
Leander A. Fulmer ct al. VS.. James A.
Vandiver ct al.
No. 5is44. Complaint to foreclose inn
proyement lien.
Be it known, that on the 9TH day Of
by their attorneys, filed in the office Of
the clerk o. the Superior Court OF Marion
COUNTY in the State of Indiana, their COM
plant against the above named defendants,
and the said plaintiffs having also filed in
said clerks Office the affidavit of a COM
petent person, showing that said defend
ants, James A. Vandiver and - Van
diver, his wife. are not residents OF the
State of Indiana: that said action is to
enforce a lien upon real estate in Marion
county for public improvements in the city
OF Indianapolis and the said defendants
are necessary parties thereto, and whereas
said plaintiffs having by Endorsement on
said complaint required said defendants to
appear In said court, and answer or demur
thereto, on the Goth day of March, 1896
Now, therefore, by order OF said court,
by notified of the filing and tendency of
said complaint against them, and that un-
less they appear and answer or demur
thereto, at the calling of said cause on
the 30th day of March, 1896, the same be-
ing the 18th judicial day of a term of
said court to be begun and held at the
courthouse in the city of indianapolis, on
the first Monday in March. 1896. said com
plant and the matters and Things therein
contained and alleged, will be heard and
determined in their absence.
JAMES w. FESLER. Clerk.
Clifford, Browder & Moffett, Attorneys
for plaintiffs.
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State of Indiana. Marion County. IS. In
the Superior Court OF Marion County. in
the State Of Indiana.
Leander A. Fulmer et al. VS.. Mary E..
Mack et al
No. slsls. Complaint to f~oreclose improve
ment lien.
BE IL known. that on the attn day OF Janu-
AIRY. 1896. the above named plaintiffs. by
their attorneys, filed in the office of the
Clerk or the Superior Court OF Marion
County. In the State. of Indiana, their com
plant against the above named defendants
and the said Plaintiffs. having also filed in
said Clerks office the affidavit or a COM
petent- person. showing that said defend
ants. Mary T. Mack and - Mack. her
husband, are not residents Of the State of
Indiana. that said action Is 10 enforce a
lien upon real estate in Marion county for
public improvements In the city of Indi-
annapolis. and the said defendants are neces-
sary parties thereto, and whereas said
plaintiffs having by Endorsement on said
complaint required said defendants 10 appear
In said court. and answer or demur thereto.
said defendants last above named are mere.
by notified of the hl.ng and tendency OF
said complaint against them. and that unless
they appear and answer or demur thereto. an
the calling or said cause on the 30th day OF
March. 1s96. the same being the 18th judicial
day OF q term or said court TO be begun and
held at the courthouse In the city OF Indi-
1S36. said complaint and the matters and
things therein contained and alleged will
be heard and determinsd in their absence.
JAMES W. FESLER, Clerk.
cltnord. Brovder a Moneft, Attorneys for
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

To Whom 1t May Concern:
1 take this method of saying tina the
card published in the daily papers of Shell
byville OF Feb. II. 1896. was the result Of
a mistake. and that the publication, asser-
ton or inference that the arrest OF my son
Albert was the result of spite work is a
mistake, and especially as far as IL related
to any connection of Mrs. Emma Ray
with the charges against Albert, and 1
desire 10 exonerate her from any blame
whatever in the matter, and TO say that
her actions have been perfectly fair and
proper. LEWIS s.. RICKETTS,.
To Whom IL May Concern:
As rumors nave been circulated that /
had INDUCED in remarks d~erogatory. to
Mrs. Emma Ray. IL affords me pleasure
TO say that l have known her for "a long
time and know nothing derogatory 10 her
character. Any assertion that ! have in
dulged In remarks derogatory 10 her are
based upon a mistake. as 1 have not
willingly done so. and deny any alleged re-
marks IL may be said l have made.
BERT RICKETTS,.
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State of Indiana, Marion county, S.: In
the Superior Court of Marion county in
the State of Indiana.
Leander A Fulmer ct al. VS.. Carl ".
Reusch ct al.
No. 5l641. Complaint to foreelose i'm
provement lien.
Be it known that on the eth day of jan
uary, 1896, the above-named plaintiffs, by
their attorneys, filed in the office of the
clerk of the Superior Court of Marion
county, in the State of Indiana, their COM
plant against the above-named defend
ants, and the said plaintiffs having also
filed in said clerks office the affidavit of
a competent person, showing that said de-
PENDANTS, Carl V. Reusch and - Reusch,
Indiana: that said action is to enforce a
lien upon real estate in Marion county for
public improvements in the city of Indian
apolis, and the said defendants are neces-
sary parties thereto: and whereas said
plaintiffs, having by Endorsement on said
complaint requires said defendants to ap-
pear in said court. and answer or demur
thereto, on the 30th day of March, 1896:
Now, therefore, by order of said court,
hereby notified of the filing. and tendency
of said complaint against them, and that,
unless they appear and answer or demur
thereto. at the calling of said cause on
the 30th day of March, 1896. the same being
the 18th judicial day of a term of said
court to be begun and held at the court
house In the city of Indianapolis, on the
first Monday in March, 1896. said complaint
and the matters and things therein con-
tanned and alleged, will be heard and de-
termined in their absence.
VI W. FESLER, Clerk.
Clifford. Browder x Moffett, Attorneys
for Plaintiffs.
The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

State Of Indiana. Marion county. SIS.
In the Superior Court OF Marion county,
IN the State OF Indiana.
Leander A. Fuimer ct al. vs.. Susan c.
40. sIsss. Complaint to foreclose i'm
Be IL known. that on the 9TH day of
January, 1896, the above named plaintiffs.
oy their attorneys. fled in the office of the
clerk of the Superior Court of Marion
county. in the State OF Indiana, their COM
plant against the above. named. defendants,
and said plaintiffs having also. filed in said
clerks office the affidavit or n competent
person, showing that said defendants,
Susan G.. Snyder and - Snyder, her hus-
Indiana; that said action Is TO enforce a
lien upon real estate in Marion county
for public improvements ins the city OF
Indianapolis. and tile said defendants are
necessary parties thereto, and whereas said
plaintiffs having by Endorsement on said
complaint required said defendants TO APP
pear In said court, and answer or demur
Now. therefore, by order of said court.
said defendants last above named are here
BY notified OF the fling and tendency of
said complaint against them. and that un-
less they appear and answer or demur
thereto. at the calling OF said cause on
the 30th day OF March, 1896, the same being
the 18Th judicial day OF a term of said
court to be begun and held at the court
house In the city of Indianapolis, on the
plant and the matters and things therein
contained and alleged. will be heard and
determined in their absence.
JAMES W.. FESLER, Clerk.
Clifford. Browder x Mofett. Attorneys
for Plaintiffs.