illustrations added to the interest and force of what he had to say. Now and then a Macaulay-like roll would sound in his sentences; and he would frequently imitate Macaulay’s rhetorical tricks, as by declaring, with conscious humor, that some local event had “never been equalled between the old bridge and the bayou”; but he wrote usually without affectation, and his prodigious memory made possible a variety of suggestion and illustration that never failed to distinguish his work. During many years he was at different times a contributor of editorial matter to all of the Indianapolis newspapers, extending his field at intervals to the Chicago and Cincinnati dailies. He wrote usually at his home, and latterly had no desk in any newspaper office, though a member of the _News_ staff to the end of his life. His manuscript was famous among Western printers, who encountered it at Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Chicago, and in the day of Mr. Sulgrove’s greatest activity seemed unable to escape from it. He wrote habitually on the backs of old election tickets, on scraps of programmes, on bits of paper picked up on his country walks, but never by any chance on a clean new sheet designed for the purpose. His handwriting was microscopic, but perfectly legible, carefully punctuated, and free from erasure. A slip the length and breadth of the hand might contain half a column. No more interesting figure than he ever appeared in Indiana journalism; but his ambitions were not equal to his talents, and he was long an obscure figure in the city of his birth, whose intimate history he knew familiarly. His “History of Indianapolis and Marion County” (1884) contains only slight hints of his superior abilities. His contemporary, George C. Harding (1829-1881), was a native of Tennessee, but gave the best years of his life to journalism at Indianapolis. He was a student of human nature rather than of books, but his literary instincts were true, and in the two weekly newspapers, the _Herald_ and the _Review_, which he conducted, he was at once the inspiration and the terror of his contributors. Some of the sketches in a volume of his “Miscellaneous Writings” (1882) show an agreeably humorous turn. He had the trained journalist’s appreciation of condensed wisdom. It was his habit to repeat, week after week, a satirical paragraph in which some individual was pilloried until the victim’s name became a by-word and a hissing in the community. Sometimes this served a moral purpose; again the intention was purely humorous. Years ago a candidate for constable, who was also a delegate to the nominating convention held at Indianapolis, received therein exactly one vote. The question, “Who voted for Daubenspeck?” was thereupon reiterated weekly in the _Herald_, until it passed permanently into a phrase of local speech.