Rensselaer Republican, Volume 18, Number 21, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 28 January 1886 — Not Purely a Mistake. [ARTICLE]

Not Purely a Mistake.

The Domestic Sewing Machine Company HAVE changed their agency, and C. B. Steward is, and has. been, the only recognized agent of tile “Domestic” in Rensselaer. Other parties have tried, it is true, to get the agency, and have advertised themselves as such; bht I wish the people to know that I am the Sole and Only of the “Domestic” Sewifcg Mhfckfae in Jasper county.

U. B. STEWARD.

The Indianapolis Journal is authority for the statement that “when the present financial programme of the L. N. A. & C. Ry., is carried out the road will be bonded for a debt of $21,000 per mile, but free fronf all floating debt, and with money in the treasury to improve the road-bed and increase the equipments.” The L. N. A. & C, has, by the way, long since ceased to be an old fogy southern company, but is an enterprising and progressive aißtorthern corporation as exists in The big slander case from Pulaski county, of Monroe C. Brick vs. Theodore tried in the Jasper Circuit Court, last week, was given to the jury on Friday afterripon. The parties are bro-thers-in-law, having both married daughters of Mr. McCandless, alleged libel consisted in Hazetfffiayjng that,Brick had stolen c<Sii belonging to their common father-in-law, Mr. McCandless, and in calling him a of a . There x seems to have been no attempts made to deny that the words were spoken, nor to attempt to prove that the charge of theft was true, the main defense being an attempt to prove that Hazelett had so explained his remarks that they did not amount to an actual charge of stealing. * The father-in-law himself testified that he had never missed any corn nor suspected nor accused Brick of stealing any from him. The jury remained out 24 hours, and then, having reported that they were unable to agree upon a verdict' were discharged, by special Judge, J. W. Douthit. Four of the jury were in favor of finding for the plaintiff, and eight for the defendant. The case was tried once in Pukski, and a verdict of ss(){) given the plaintiff, * but which, for some reason, was set aside by the Court. The court costs of the case were about S2OO, which Pulaski county will have to pay.