The Onaga Herald from Onaga, Kansas • Page 1

-y A Ik 1 1 i OS AIAJOCRNAL, Establisned May D.1S78 )SA ICR. AT, Kstaolished Oct. 1, ') ttHnAl P. Established April 1. 1S9U.

OXAOA. POTTA WATOMTE COUNTY. KANSAS, DECEMBER SO. 1920. VOL.

XXXI NO. 43 State ilistoricil Sotkt? ii Li IP Ax with reference to crystallizing it in-1 wolf, replevin; continued of Kansas vs Ed Lutson, recovery of. man, attachment; judgement as per -S I I I I WASHINGTON NEWS. Correspondence.) uk; i it the people of the members (if iht to legislative accomplishment and Louise tJowser vs John A. walker, taxes; dismissed.

journal entry. have found them eager to help in the breach of promise; continued. County of Pottawatomie, State of Thomas Reilly vs Joseph J. Cun- 'constructive task," he remarked. John B.

White et al vs Union Pa-J Kansas vs E. D. Hessier, attachment, r.een, possession of real estate; con-There are bureau.2 of the 'cine Railway a corporation et al, continued. Otto Secrest vs Tom Brooks et Mary A. Haynes et al vs Joseph C.

i recovery of money; continued. Young et al, partition; judgement for Official Statement of the Financiar Condition of the Onaga Bank at Onaga, State of Ka isas, at the close of business on the ISth day of December, 1920. RESOURCES of Rep re. er.tatives at the op-j government, more or less unrelated recovery of money; continued. of the first session of the 67th to the departments in which they are' Andersen Hickman vs William oi rr' ess will be Harri-" Bixler of now placed, all of which bear direct- Maerke, damages; continued.

who wiil come to upon the citizen, and could with' J. W. Mooney vs E. C. Car, reple- over much the same route advantage be grouped together in avin; continued.

j.ui -ned by James A. Garfield. When Department of Public Welfare. The' Margaret Sullivan vs Robert Kol-liixH-r was a boy he drove a team un public Health Service, the Bureau of terman et al, damages; continued. tow path of a Pennsylvania canal Education, the Children's Bureau, and; Geo.

Gareis vs Cristopher Burgess a.vl irked on a farm until he was the Woman's Bureau are some of the ft al; quieting title; continued. ev n'een years, of age. lie taught offices which could be readily trans-i John Magor et al vs Catherine P. Ida Bergsen vs John Yelen et al, plaintiff quieting title, petition; Maurice Murphy appointed Ira C. Kellsy vs I.

S. Taylor et guardian ad litum; A. E. Nelson and judgement for plaintiff quieting title. Albert Holt and Herman Holt ap-' John Leer vs Peter Youngs et pointed as commissioners.

al, foreclosure of mortgage; judge-George Mishey vs the unknown ment for plaintiff 335, interest at 8 heirs etc of Benjamin F. Seymour et per cent. al, quieting title; judgement for plain Laura Moran vs Frederick C. Mor- an, divorce; dismissed. tiff quieting title.

$227,052 49 171 02 h-i--l, tool; a urse in business col-; erred to organization. It Fuller et al; judgement for plaintiff he new Loans and discounts Loans on real estate Overdrafts, unsecured Bank bldg $6,575, furn. fixt'rs $1,500 began as a wood chopper in a would be quite suitable, too. for quitting title In the matter of the Receivership of the Farmers State Bank of Wame-' Auto worked his way up woman to direct Federal activities F. L.

McBride vs Brunkow lumber camp am 8,075.00 I HARDING FAVORS ANTI-STRIKE go, Kansas, application for receiver 1 Ci.i i i recovery of money; continued. the management of a large lum- of that nature. I I I uiiueu otaies Donas on Hand 31,750 00 Bonds to secure state deposits 13 500 no LAW Washington, December 27 With i E. E. Brunkow, etc.

vs United i to sell property; continued. Tire damages; James A. Lenipenau vs Gussie Mee, Wm. E. O'Neil vs the Farmers attachment; judgement as per stipu- Guaranty fund with State bonds 1,000 00 State Bank of Wamego, to set aside ilation liering company.

He is now exten- fively interested in manufacturing and banking and because of his var-i iod experiences will be able to take; a practical view of every problem cming be fore him as a Congressman. I lie has served as city councilman, President of the school board, mayor of his citv and as sheriff and trea ur- odhu items ana clearing Douse items 223 02 Cash and sight exchange, legal 53,283 49 pretensions of amazement tiiat the Senate passed the anti-strike bill, labor union leaders are reported to be sending "rumblings" to Marion, Ohio apparently for the purpose of enlisting Senator Harding in opposition to the bill. In view of the vote The First National Bank of Lincoln, vs Wm Littlefield, on note; continued. Ethel Harper vs Ferdinand Wegner A BUSINESS CONGRESS A glance over the records of the men elected to Congress on November 2 -hows a large proportion of men who have won the confidence of their constituents by demonstration of unusual ability in practical affairs, a large proportion of them having had experience in a number of of industry. STILL ABROAD The idea of President Wilson try- an assignment and recovery on no'.

revived in the name of W. A. Knecht and case continued. The Kaw Valley State Savings Bank, Wamego, vs Earl Sack-rider, attachment; continued. Margaret Guilfoyle vs Ed Sullivan recovery of money.

damages; continued. R. W. Harper vs Ferdinand the Senate last spring, together ner, damages; continued. cr of his county.

A MARYLAND CAVALIER The training of a lawyer, a warrior author and sportsman are com- The Shyhe Meister Merc. Co. vs C. D. Sloggett et al, recovery of money; judgement for plaintiff of $145.65 John Leer, Sr.

vs John Leer. Total $335,055 02 LIABILITIES Capital stock paid in 30,000 00 Surplus fund 7 000 ot) Interest, $11,121 52 Exchange, 311 65 $11,433 17 Less current expenses, interest and taxes paid S.313 94 3,119 23 Individual deposits, iiiiT lo iiK'irci Liie iiuiii judgement as purn- bhvd in th" qualification. of John Turks when toe won't even protect with interest at 8 per cent. I ta i emr- with the campaign utterances of Mr Harding when he was a candidate for the Presidency, with the record cf the popular vote at the November election, it is difficult to imagine how the labor leaders could be surprised at the recent passage of the bill or how they could expect to receive any encouragement from Marion in their opposition to the measure which j. i.n., coou and law-aouuncr people oi rii Kan Frank Fields vs Josie Peyrouse et al, damages; continued Union Pacific R.

R. Co. vs David oiltriii nr uji he United State -v from the rapacity recoverv of m0ney; continued, of the outlaws. Arthm. Trezise et al vs Frank Ditch THE JOB IN HAND et al, recovery of money; continued.

The American people expect a sub-' Frank G. ColwelLvs J. W. Johnson stantial reduction in their Federal as executor of the purported last will A. Johnson et al.

possession of land; ed congressman from -Maryland. Hill's lv is in Baltimore. He has the disi-inction of ing defeated th? ire fr.t Democratic incumbent in the Third district and thus helping to win Mai viand over to the Republican column. 1 1 1 1 is a graduate of Johns continued. subject to check Fannie Dugan vs Newton Dugan, right to continuous transportation ertllicates Ot deposit, due contempt of court; continued.

taxes, and a revision of what is and ec, to set aside a will; continued Union Pacific R. R. Co vs Herman in less than 30 days. service. It will be remembered that Sen- 221,090 78 25 4'8 48 13,009 88 34,184 32 Henningson et al, possession of land; continued.

ator Harding voted for the anti- I strike amendment to the railroad bill, and was taken to task for his vote. Union Pacific R. R. Co. vs Jennie Banks' and bankers' deposit.

Certificates of deposit, due on or after 30 days Reserved for tax k-ns and of Harvard- has a program is not only possible' -ihomas Leach vs W. Alien, mo-tced law' in Boston and' but i. the logical one for Congress tioTi foriew trial; continued. it renebinn- a cnep iv E. B.

Emory vs John C. Case et al, Tie saw active service the field en lli I-1- rtacnmg a the Mexican border in 1916, and was agreement with foreign governments foreclosure of mortgage; submitted rn active dutv in the war 'with to the United States, byn briefs. rt f'-vhi'-Vi intr-pcf tbir indeMe'lne" i "ell Richards, Executrix, vs Anna rope from the date of the entrance of "nin lnjI inotote incc--: this country into the conflict. He will be paid, an income of half Shards et al, mortgage foreclosure served in defense of the Center Soc-jmion cloliars will be assured. By, continued tor.

Haute AVace. and Meuse-Argon 1 letting a new tariff law on the stnt-i Henry Kre.ger vs the Bittman Mer. et recoverv of monev. He made a direct and uneouivocal 293,763 4G 1,172 33 reply, setting forth his reasons for i supporting the amendment, and his reply was largely "published, so tho voters everywhere knew of his atti- re anr hecnuse ot his distinguished i Albert Buche vs the Bittman Mer. service in the operations north of i Republican lines of protection, an Vei'un was decorated with the Croix M.

Banks et al, possession of land; continued. The Union Pacific R. R. Co. vs Andrew D.

Hoy et al, Fred J. Grichaber et al, Reuben W. Week? et al, Gd. II. Weeks et al, Fred W.

Klasse et al, John F. Fisher et al, John M. Houston et al, Hamilton Hutchison et al, Mary Dawe et al, John Kramer et al, Rebecca Hesse et al, Louise Koelling et al, Matilda M. Helm et al, Mary Young Moses et al, O. B.

Larson et al Louisa Denning et al, Aloysius A. Schroepfer et al, Henry Fulmer et al, Maurice T. Graf et al, Peter C. Young et'al, possession of land; tude on the subject. Hfs election by a plurality of more than 7,000,000 was a rather strong endorsement of his attitude.

In his letter answering I de Guerre, wih silver star, by the his critics, Senator Hart" French. Ho her of book ni I no' iona is the author of a on low. mibl'e evv'iV military policy. "-He additional source of revenue will et al, recovery ot money; cont d. produced yielding about 1 Anthony Straub vs the Bittman each year, paid as in the other in- Merc.

Co.et al, recovery of money, ftmicc by the; foreigner instead of- continued. the. American taxpayer. It would Ed Payne vs the Bittman Mer. Co.

then be possible to wipe out the aJ recovery of money; defendant excess profits tax, which has been Piv'en 10 days to amend petition; 10 the cause of most of the profiteering given for reply and case cont'd. "I favored the anti-strike clause because it anplies to a nublic service unaer governmental regulations, in tabes great intere in outdoor sport -pecially fox hunting. TWO YEARS ON LEGISI ATIVF ROCK PILE which Congress exercises its power to limit the return on capital invett- the conntrv has been sub- Lonst. Umscheid, admr. vs the Uitt- ed fixes rates at which the public must ntirtl rerlnp-lman Merc.

et al, recovery of of the Sih tions in the income tax without im-i money, continued. When the Republicans. be served, and, finally, in the anti-strike clause, provides a capable tribunal for the adjustment of all Total 335,055 02 State of Kansas, County of Pottawatomie, ss. Anna Lewis, Casnier of said bank, do soie.iiiilv swear that above statement is true; that said bunk hps no liabilities, and is not indorser on any note or otner sh nvn on the, above sta isment. to the best of my knowledge and belief, so help me ANNA LEWIS, Cashier.

Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 21st day of December, 1920 L. B. DUNN, Notary Public. (Ccimnission expires on the 2nd. dav of J.

W. Dunn J. A. Bon jour Ella G. Dunn, Hattie L.

Booth, Anna Lewis Directors. To: Walter E. Wilson, Bank Commissioner, Topeka, Kansas. received1 M. Umscheid, admr.

vs the bitt-I man Merc. Co. recovery of money, pairing the by the Treasury. labor grievances, so that no inter ruption in trasportation need be continued. B.

J. Allen et al vs John H. Schlae-gel, recovery of money; continued. Geo. W.

DeGraw vs R. F. Buchanan dismissed at cost of plaintiff as per stipulation. State of Kansas vs Fred Murphey et violating blue sky law; continued. State of Kansas vs Edward J.

Groth violating blue sky law; continued. I continued. W. H. Kelly vs Charles Doolittle IN THE DISTRICT COURT j.md Freeland Crosswhite, damages apprehended.

of California, which includes 1 beautiful San; a Clara Valley, a candidate who could admin ister a ei trouncing to the De-lrouratic incumbc nt of the congress-! vol seat from uhat district they arc he. 1 out Hon. A. M. Free, of Ion Jo and prevailed upon him to "In our modern life all the people are dependent on railway transporta The following have been dis-i pored of: The State of Kansas vs Thomas for assult; motion suspended and case continued.

Mabel M. Combs et al vs Nettie Trent et al, partition; plaintiff given 30 days to file amended petition and cae continued. tion for food, comfort and health, security and the necessary material for productive activity and attending the Republican nomination. Walsh, parole; continued. I result was that his dis.rict went The Stateof Kansas vs Charles bv 20.0( 0.

Free is a law- i parole, continued. I John Mr. Josenh Bandel et al vs i9P served as Dis-, xhe State of Kansas vs Leslie1 yer nrcfes-ion, Peter Gurtler vs J. O. Benton, recovery of money; continued.

Albert Lintz vs Elmer Modin, of referee; continued. Maud Lloyd vs William Lloyd, divorce; continued. Lee Bruce vs E. F. Snodgrass, re livelihood.

It has become a prime necessity. If the government, representing all the people, cannot guarantee transportation service under any and all conditions, it fails utterly. If that same government trbt Attorney of Santa Clara county Schwandt et al, misdemeanor; eon-j I I I W. Shaw et. al, mortgage foreclosure continued.

Will Volkening vs the Bittman Mere. recoyfy of money; continued. Walter L. Cropper vs W. N.

Stevens recovery of money; continued Thn Pro1 rimwn Qf cannot provide just consideration but has resigned, that position with 'the determination never again to en- xhe State of Kansas vs Mary tor public life. The appeal to him to gWeeney and Joe McCoy, disturbing become a candidate for congress pre- the reace; continued on bond already vailed over his personal inclination and for the next two years, at The St.ltc of KaRsas vs Earl Sack- covery of money; continued. Clifton N. McArthur, of Oregon, is in December following hi William Flenthrone vs the Farmers of the workmen operating the trans- tion," he asserts, "the Civil War might have been averted." The first of Congressman McArth State Bank, motion for new trial; portation system, it fails again. Ic the author of two proposed amend-continued.

and must do both. nients to the Constitution, recently Joseph L. Vilven vs Patrick Cooper "It is far afield from the main introduced in the Houe of Represen- Mr Free will not be free to eniov the ider, drawing check unlawfully; con- tachment dismissed at cost of plaintiff saluhrious climate ot the land or ur amendments fixes thp fW. damaees: continued. question to talk about enslaving the without prejudice.

Ephriam Bcnjour vs E. B. Home- shine, fruit and flowers, but wilP be The State of Kansas vs Joseph! corfined to hard service within the KW Inw eon-! Charles M. Fischer vs Jacob laboring man. Nothing is farther thdv Mn'ay in Hecker, attachment; continued.

the truth. The law specifically n0 SLtZt i Wamego State Bank vs Bert Ker- preserves to the individual his right Vln the Lerm of Wi woou, ii. cayies, vvesiey uurtier national capital at a h- tinuectbv consent. T. as Board of Countv Commissioners, wall- of ington.

1 hp t.nncn vs ner- injunction; motion sustained and SMOOT HAD THE RECEIPTS ger and Frank Rainey, burglary and sey as adm, et al, confirmation; sale to ouit his employment. It provides, take their Te tTT' confirmed. government- guarantee of just enter unon the Dt" T-ell J. Reillv. et al vs treatment while he remains in the oH.ce and enter upon tntCcnibcr of the fanie year of v.

bf-nar(rp thp imnps As the, March 4th of the follow! year. G. M. Seaton, director, Geo. E.

Fran-' railway employment. Constitution and the laws now rro-'ii i plaintiff given leave to withdraw petition. Robert Scott vs W. R. Johnson 'et al, to set aside a judgement; cont'd.

Sinclair Refining Co. vs H. L. Cline, recovery of money on account; cont'd. cis, treasurer, Thos.

J. McManus, clerk, "There has been no intent to inter- the president assumes conrol ConT and" injunction; judgement for de-ere with the plan of collective bar- of thc executive branch of the Gov. fJ S5i, rv tl, cSfloc rvair J.n;t5 pnn-' crainmo- i-nrmipHtivfl nrivato ntrJ l''Jie any by SO-Called While legislation for the control of the moat packers was pending in the Senate a few days ago, Senator Reed Smoor, of Utah, presented in a very impressive manner a few facts designee! to l'Vtte responsibility for liigh meat prices. He showed by his eon bill in the handwrit- on March 4th. four months j.

icnuai.i, uwtu i ii -t-ernmcnt Lewis Weeks vs Frank Allen, eject i ally- I prise. This provision deals lely the h.ve' elected him rt with a rubhc service. Instead of t- 1 with a public service. Instead of Mrs. A.

W. Sutherland et al vs Chas executive. senators ana The ampndmpnt nrr.vt,!. J. Sutherland et al, to set aside a reaction, this is a great step forward.

Con.ressmen are conir)elIed to wait "JZ qt lnat 1 rc.iHiential shail -begin deed submitted on brief. Surely the organized railway larceny; plead guilty of grand larceny and dismissed as to burglary. State of Kansas vs Stephen plead guiby to grand larceny. Louisa Harris vs Owen Harris, recovery on note; continued. W.

E. White vs Julius Immenschuh, breach of contract; continued. Tillie D. Craig vs H. E.

Leonard, possession of laud; continued. M. Greenfield vs Fred A. Greenfield, custody of children; not to bepiit on docket until further order. Myrtle Willis vs Preston Earl Willis, contempt of court; continued.

in partition; work- 'V. Tir.Ti nrsr in iiprenirur -l ir t. ment; continued. i Fred J. Bernritter vs David Allen, I ejectment; continued.

W. L. Colton vs Associated Mill i Elevator et al, attachment; dis- missed at cost of plaintiff without 1 n. fin Qir 1 i.f1H.(.1.w In the appeal of Ephriam Bonjour men ask no more than full justice. of the foUowing year, a delay of or abr.ut five th from an order of etc vs Board of and in this act the government estab-j thirteen months, before they are eiection am onp Week fni ti, r-f Washington ntprehants, that cas now raying per pound pit loin whereas he raid a pound in 1P12.

From thi-virg Serator Smoot argued that for hich meat rrie- nnnnti- pnmmissinnprs anneal: rontin- lishe? the tribunals for the award of i i i i ho- VJ ti tv t0 national iegi- meetinr of Coneress. That week that lustice. I do not know that such a prejudice. ued no.l lation unless tne rresiuent in me vA tt. 9tV neeuea, in tne opinion ot the author 1 1 1 TT T- 1 T.

Tl. rV1.i ll Ml :1 A J. 1 ti. nTn Aired ii. er a vs amne Martin Koacn vs donn iMCLiertv.

re-, law win prevent ranwav siriKes. out: i mfsi i sjps nr. ti c-ii 51 -it'iii 1 1 1 ij Tj.T ai 1 iv" the v. 1 c-. Cnrc i spencer et ai, quieting title; cont a.

covery ot money ior service; com a. i ao Know mai ic ougnt 10. anu vote lor President and ice Presi- li relailer. Senator ion the Matt Rezac as guardian, vs Charle5 Arthur M. Pitney vs Walter S.

Pit-' think the great rank and file of rail- 0tnpr civibzed country vciib, dii-i v. i.iL'-'.'z 'July i Re von pr -al fr, eif rlooH T-f if irT, nrnnarrv" rpnorr nf ix-rirk-er miThr tn u'pirnmp it. tt. tr.at there is sor a 1., "ciares "tolerates tne 4V, 1 c-in i Tt me thii'T ra'h'call ivi.s, hl i.jt i limiius veiii vs oabeBn neuiv ei commissioners tuiun meu, cm.11 n. suepcis n'c iioiwirniut; -i-jn.

finnT College. The amendment quieting title; continued. i eieotoral cf irear but expres for industrial peace with unfailing, al. quieting title; dismissed and costs judge as per journal entry. he election and inauguration of the further provdies that the electoral Frank Fredericks vs Nels Hender lrrPi ft(1n the tnat paid Delia Swindell vs George Swindell jutiee to-all concerned, which is president of the United States and i ,1 til of its rurrose if it reached vote shall be canvassed by the speaker of the House instead of the Pres- Mary Ann Kimble, administratrix divorce granted on grounds of cruelty the heart of the American millions the eieetion and qualification of without prejudice.

today. wnesaier ana pacKer oni. Arriegate vs Elizabtth'et al vs Leo Zocller and M- L- J. M. Dodson vs August Hoferer, A CABINET LADY O'Brien et al.

ouieting title; contin-' rocovery of money; continued. recovery on note; continued. Representatives and Senators; As iden(. of the Senate, and, in case no to our present system, he c.andjfiate gets a majority, that the charges that often legislative and IIouse sha by jndividuai mem. "If you and.

your assiciates know a better plan, if you know of anything surpassing the supremacy of just executive authority are permitted to vote jnstead of bv States as There is every likelihood that soon ued. L. C. Riat vs Bittman Merc. Henrv Scheel vs J.

O. after the ir.augura tion of President Champion D. Kircher vs Pricilla recovery of money, continued. mortgage forclosure; continued. Harding there will be created a new Kircher et al.

to set aside a judge-' Josep Manley vs Samuel Bennett, Mary Sweeney vs Andrew Stinger, 1 government, you Know oi a nope tV, "reseni. more promising than your govem- ties and individuals who have been covery of money; continued. bright of possession; continued. tt of Public Welfare and ic ment; to be submitted on briefs. i erarmei ment commital to last treament.

tv i i also probable that a woman will be Anna M. Lyan vs red L-neshaber G. H. O'DonnelT vs W. C.

Beall, re-! Marion Jenkins and da ai stated Congre-sman Marion Jenkins ana ana JenK.n.N let me how it. and I will be happy and fn-a -r- i L'or- lne i)eLlw' 01 "tprt.ion mu McArthur, "only because of my t'w be.o cf that ever-ip ive damatres: continued. r-i oinn atu, u. V.1IUU, i. l0 5UD-enoe to it instead oi toe between the eb via u', Trt tiih.v-ri ti if ictoif a uncertainty between the b-anch.

The suggestion has already Neander C. Ewing vs Union Pacific Tn nf fTa nrt a ner'" 1 eiecuon? ana wish to hrlng about and wiiT; judgj aent as per wiil: iud aent as 1 RniKvav Cc pf si. motion for new i me wiien nuuiw '-J economical administration and legis-assnmes control of national affairs tne tln-e nen tne victorious party i.ni: anna cott, aamr irom tne rrobate joi'rnai enn), best yet offered to ail who are con- ad-iress 3tr. itarumg nas uiai; cor.unueu. I Court, continued.

tt 11 1 i 1 I idtiVII. QUI II'IL HI ail stlllUiiir; J. vs loa. et al, cemed witn the pood fortunes of our h(i Aa an intance wicii. inev wiii ue coiisnieieu at in given a to the n.ea tna: r-winsr.

aoniinisuator J. B. Thompson vs National Hay mortgage foreclosure; judgement et al, recovery of money; sub- quieting title. certain of reali- of the estate of Hattie E. Ewir.gr, de- common ou.ry.

the harm whkh may C0ITle t0 thc present session but am introducing 1 'country as a result of tho'se long them for the nurnose of focusing to von ceased vs. Union Pacific Railway Co. ''I am now able miited on briefs. H. A.

Fulmer vs the Unknown hoirs that "iuce the election I have had et motion for new trial; continued. Earl A. Cole vs Tony Schroeder, of Samuel Spencer et quietin FIRST AND SECOND MONDAYS delays, Mr McArthur cites the vac- public attention on what I consider iliatir.g policy of President Buchanan very important questions, and trust cr T.inerJnts first pletirin. it. to discuss that proposal Lee Ilirscb.

vs I. J. Poague, dam IN DECEMBER i al. recovery of money; contiuned. judgement quieting title.

of liber-1 fre, a r.u:":oer oi mat iiie reuiuiig i.i Washington, Dec. 27 Cornerman '-Hal Lincoln been able to take his pr0juce results later on." Den.n?-' The county of Pottawatomie, S.ate B. F. Wyatt et al vs T. D.

Baugh- vs J. D. Dan out of Cor.r'r th.ritg'it in a i.