Page 1 of 11

Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:42 pm
by Matthew Roberts
Emil Thoma (Thomas) and Julia Kaln were married in Colorado City, Texas in 1883. They left Texas and came indirectly to Phoenix. Emil was a meat cutter and butcher while Julia was a baker and made candy items. Shortly after arriving in Phoenix Emil Thomas entered into a rent agreement with Alexander Steinegger in which Steinegger would rent a store on Washington Street (156 E. Washington) in downtown Phoenix to Emil to run a Bakery and Ice Cream parlor. Emil also sold oysters, fresh fruit, sandwiches and soda water at the store.

Alexander Steinegger married Emil Thomas's sister Caroline. Emil and Steinegger were brothers-in-law.

When Emil W. Thomas abandoned Julia he headed for Centralia, Washington leaving Julia with the bills of their bakery and to carry on herself. The business arrangement for the bakery candy, oyster and ice cream parlor that Emil and Julia operated was between Emil Thomas and his brother in law, Alex Steinegger, not with Julia.

As soon as Emil left town, Alexander Steinegger arranged to have someone else lease the store space from him. Julia Thomas was forced to vacate the premises and look for a different location for the ice cream, oyster parlor, confectionery and bakery.

The store Emil Thomas and Julia rented from Steinegger and operated together was located on Washington Street between 1st and 2nd street ( 156 E. Washington ) Block 20 on the North side of Washington Street.

After Emil abandoned Julia, Julia found another location, a store owned by a local businessman. This store was located on Washington Street between Central and 1st street ( 24 E. Washington ) Block 21 on the North side of Washington Street. Just 1 block west of her previous location.

But the lease for the new store did not include a bakery, ice cream, fruit and oyster parlor which was the business Julia was engaged in. Instead, it was a restaurant, the Star Restaurant. It is unclear if Julia sub leased this business to someone else or if she operated the restaurant herself. The business directories for Phoenix do not show her as proprietor at this location. The business remained the Star Restaurant.

From Sims Ely’s book, The Lost Dutchman Mine. Chapter 7, page 91.

“ Mrs. Thomas had been trained as a baker, and soon after she and her husband came to Phoenix, they started a home bakery. The Thomas bread became quickly popular in the little city, and the business prospered, even though Charley Thomas soon dropped out of the picture and disappeared. Ambitious and daring, Helena Thomas took a lease on a frame building which fronted North on Washington – an east west street – half a block East of the intersection of Washington and Central, which was the business center. ”
An alley along the Easterly side of the building bisected the block. On these premises she had a partition erected which divided what became the bakery and the business office from a retail section.”

This would be at 33 E. Washington Street on the South side of Washington street in Block 22 of the city of Phoenix. The store, was owned by a man named Phillips who rented (sub-leased) the store to others to run their business. The alley along the easterly side of this building was known as, Cactus Way.

MJ McKeligan owned the building housing “Archer’s saloon” next door to the west of Phillips store. McKeligan sub-leased the saloon to proprietor A.M.Archer who was also the bartender.

This information by Ely is exact and precise and detailed. Not a general location such as, on Washington east of Center Street. Ely was extremely specific of the location. If he hadn’t been sure or didn’t know the location, he would have just given it a general location description. But instead he detailed it right down to the alley that ran by the east side of the business.

Why did Ely do this ? So many things in his book are “general” in nature and he chooses this to become exacting and precise over.

It’s because this is exactly where Julia ws working with her bakery and confectionery after Emil left town and she was forced out of Steinegger’s store.

Julia held the lease on the “Star Restaurant” but she also was the proprietor of the bakery and confectionery that Ely so precisely describes on page 91 of his book.

Where did Ely get this information ?

The Bensol Business Directory for the City of Phoenix, Meyer's Directory, and business ad’s appearing in the Phoenix Gazette Evening and Saturday Review newspaper. The Directories and ad’s do not say Julia held the lease on the building on the south side of Washington, just that she was the proprietor of the business.

Charles and Dominick Donofrio had been in business selling fruit in Phoenix. Emil Thomas had an arrangement with the Donofrio’s to sell their fruit in his bakery and ice cream parlor. The Donofrio’s began making candy from the prickly pear fruit and selling it along with oranges, lemons and grapefruit. Charles Donofrio held a lease option on the Phillips store at 33 East Washington Street, the store Ely describes as being Julia’s bakery and confectionery.
City directory and advertisements in the Phoenix Gazette and Saturday Review show Julia located at this address selling bakery items, candy, oysters, ice cream and fruit in the summer and fall of 1891. These are my personal opinions based on what I have been able to read and learn.

Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:35 pm
by Ozarker
Hello All:

I am extremely hesitant to address this subject again, for several reasons, but when I see these types of inaccuracies being perpetuated it's hard to remain silent. I don't care to pick a bone with anyone, but research time for most of us is limited, and if I can save anybody some time, perhaps it will be worth it.

Yes, Emil Thoma (or Thomas) and Julia (last name debatable, but several if not most researchers have settled on Korn or Corn) were married in Texas. But it was in Mitchell County in December 1883 (not in 1887 as stated above). I’m not sure why Mr Roberts is confused about this, because the marriage certificate has been found and has been in circulation for quite some time.

And yes, Emil Thomas and Alex Steinegger were brothers-in-law, due to Steinegger’s marriage to Emil Thomas’ sister, as stated.

I cannot address whether Emil was a meat cutter or butcher by trade when he and Julia arrived in Phoenix in 1884. As far back as the 1880 US Federal Census, Emil listed his trade as Baker , and that is all I have to go on. I guess it's possible Emil branched out a little between 1880 and 1884, and may have butchered a steer or two in his time, but frankly I haven't spent any time on it.

Soon after arriving in Phoenix, Emil and Julia needed to get their feet on the ground, and Julia started a little business of her own, named the "Phoenix Coffee Stand and Ice Cream Saloon", located at the Walbridge Building on the north side of Washington Street in Block 21 (between Center and Montezuma). It's not exactly clear what her husband Emil was doing, but he was known to dabble in real estate from time to time, so he may have been checking into that line of work, or he may have simply been helping out Julia with her coffee stand and ice cream saloon business.

While Julia was running her coffee stand, Emil Ganz (a local businessman and also mayor of Phoenix) was leasing the Alex Steinegger store located on Washington Street one block east in Block 20. Alex Steinegger seemed to be thorough in executing leases associated with his store, and this first lease to Emil Ganz was no different. It can be found in the Maricopa County Records, Lease Book 1 Page 1.

The Steinegger lease to Emil Ganz was for two years beginning in March 1882, with an eight-year option through March 1892. Ganz was into his second option year on Steinegger's store when, on 9 June 1885, he relinquished his lease so that Steinegger and Emil & Julia Thomas could open a confectionary store in that location that would come to be called the "Vienna Bakery".

Two months later, on 5 August 1885, the Arizona Daily Gazette newspaper announced that Steinegger and the Thomases would open their new ice cream saloon sometime the following week, stating that they intended to combine their business - confectionery, ice cream, and a coffee stand - while substituting oysters for the ice cream in the proper season. The store was finally open for business on 16 August 1885.

The business went along fine for awhile, with ads appearing regularly in the local newspapers along with occasional mentions of how well the business was doing. The articles on a whole made clear that both Thomas and Steinegger were actively involved in running the store.

About eight months after opening the store, on 17 April 1886, it was announced in the Arizona Daily Gazette that Thomas and Steinegger had ordered a soda fountain from Tuft & Company (Boston) for one thousand dollars ($1000), and that it would be delivered in a few days. This is apparently the same fountain that figures so prominently in the LDM legend, although as can be seen, the cost is much lower than some have surmised (or even averred).

But even though the Thomas-Steinegger business partnership appeared to be doing well, it was not to last. On 13 February 1887, less than a year after purchasing the soda fountain, it was announced that the entire stock of the Thomas-Steinegger business would be sold at auction on the following Saturday, and two weeks later, on 1 March 1887, Steinegger and Thomas announced the full dissolution of their business partnership (Arizona Daily Gazette). The dissolution notice stated that Emil Thomas was leaving the partnership and that Alex Steinegger was continuing the business. The Arctic Soda Fountain went with Julia and Emil.

One month later, on 3 April 1887, Emil Thomas leased another store in the same block (Block 20), formerly leased by Shanssey and Yancy, and began fitting it up as a confectionery and ice cream parlor, which placed him and Julia in direct competition with Alex Steinegger.

Emil Thomas' new store, called the "EW Thomas Ice Cream Parlors" was open within the month, with newspaper ads appearing regularly thereafter. That is why anybody searching the city directories or local newspapers will see ads for the EW Thomas Ice Cream Parlors alongside ads for the Vienna Bakery (the former Thomas-Steinegger business now being run solely by Alex Steinegger).

So you see folks, Julia was never "evicted" by Alex Steinegger, because she and Emil had left that partnership (and that location) together and of their own accord long before Emil ever left town (not to mention long before Julia and Emil got divorced). They had started up a different store and were in direct competition with Steinegger (obviating the often-told story of Steinegger supplying the Thomas store, or of Waltz supplying the Thomas store through Steinegger. Those variations to the tale are a whole different ball of wax which can be addressed later if this thread survives).

I have never seen a lease agreement between the Thomases and Steinegger, and frankly I doubt one ever existed. As stated above, Steinegger seemed meticulous about executing leases associated with his store, beginning with the very first lease to Emil Ganz. Later on, after Steinegger closed down his sole proprietorship Vienna Bakery business, he leased the store to EH Winters who turned it into an extension of the famous "Bee Hive" millinery store (see Lease Book 2 Page 113). After Winters, Steinegger leased the store to John Baggiore and Prosper Bardone, who turned it into a liquor store (see Lease Book 2 Page 615). In each case, the lease was duly executed and filed with the Maricopa County Recorder. But there is no such lease to Julia and Emil Thomas, and I believe the explanation for that is fairly obvious. Since Steinegger was a full partner in business with the Thomases, there was no need for a lease. After all, he was the owner of the building - hence, no lease was necessary, unless he wanted to lease his own building to himself!

I can already hear the argument, so let me get out ahead of it.

Steinegger was a full-time partner in the Vienna Bakery business with the Thomases. He was not a silent partner, nor was he merely leasing space to the Thomases to run their own business. An argument to the contrary is a fallacy and always has been. A simple reading of the newspapers of the day show that Steinegger was actively involved both in the partnership and in running the store. I sincerely hope we can put this part of the false history to rest, and I am more than happy to provide references for the above statements, including copies of the various newspaper articles showing that Steinegger was not only a proprietor, but also actively involved in running the store. All I ask is to see proof of any counterclaims of a “lease” between Steinegger and the Thomases, without having to endure a snit fit because I asked for a reference. And yes, I will settle for copies of a personal diary or “family papers”, as long as their provenance can be proven.

But to finish up the story.

In September 1889, well over two years after opening their new store (and over two years in direct competition with Alex Steinegger), Emil Thomas took on a new partner named Otto Barg, but this partnership only lasted a couple of months. One result of this short-lived partnership was that Emil's business was renamed to the "Phoenix Restaurant". The naming of the business, the partnership with Otto Barg, and the dissolution of the partnership with Otto Barg all appeared in the Arizona Daily Gazette.

I won't rehash the entire story leading up to the Thomas divorce, except to say that Emil abandoned Julia in March 1890 while the "Phoenix Restaurant" was still in business, and Julia was left to run the store by herself (although apparently with some help from Rhiney Petrasch). This is where her previous business experience (being the sole proprietor of the “Phoenix Coffee Stand” when she and Emil first arrived in Phoenix) came in so handy.

Julia eventually filed for divorce from Emil in August 1891, but by that time (after a year and a half of running the store by herself) she had significantly grown the “Phoenix Restaurant” business. In fact, her business had grown so much that she needed additional space, and ended up leasing the westernmost store in the Capitol Building located in Block 21 on the north side of Washington Street. Julia's lease of this store is found in Lease Book 2 Page 132, and several newspaper accounts clearly show that this is the store she moved into, even naming the stores located immediately adjacent to her new location.

Think about what I just wrote in the previous paragraph. Julia leased and moved into a store in the Capitol Building, located on the north side of Washington Street. This is backed up by a lease agreement on file with the Maricopa County Recorder and newspaper articles describing the exact location she moved into. These news articles specifically stated that her confectionery store was moved to that location - not on the south side of Washington as Mr Roberts is trying to sell.

The store Julia moved into was owned by a prominent local dentist, Lofus Goodrich, and leased to the proprietor of the next-door Capitol Saloon, a man by the name of Ben Butler (Lease Book 2 Page 121). Julia subleased the store from Ben Butler (Lease Book 2 Page 132), not from Schooler and Wilson as stated by Mr Roberts.

In fact, Julia did not lease any building or store from Schooler and Wilson as stated by Roberts. Instead, she eventually sold her business to Schooler and Wilson, as announced in the 10 July 1892 Arizona Daily Gazette.

I cannot answer why Sims Ely got it wrong, or why Mr Roberts has decided to resurrect or perpetuate the myth, but there is absolutely no doubt where Julia relocated and ran her business.

Mr Roberts is also in error about who owned which buildings. As mentioned above, the Capitol Building (north side of Washington, where Julia actually relocated) was owned by Lofus Goodrich.

The store across the street, mistakenly identified by Sims Ely and others as the new location of Julia's store, was owned by George Loring (not Mr Phillips, another lessee who was in direct competition with Julia).

I'd really rather not go over all that evidence again (I’ve done it twice before already), but if anyone is interested in dates, page numbers, and other details of the deeds, leases and the newspaper descriptions of the various store's locations, they can all be found on the Feldman Forum, in the Julia Thomas Business Location 1891 thread, which had to be reconstituted after the original thread on the defunct forum was first shifted, then deleted, then nearly lost when the web site was perfunctorily taken down.

There are other discrepancies in Mr Roberts' post (for example, every single one of the given street addresses are in error) but I think there is enough in this post to chew on already, so I'll forego all of that at this point. Suffice it to say that Sims Ely had it wrong then, and Mr Roberts has it wrong now. It is not clear to me why anyone would continue to try to sell this bill of goods - although I suspect it is an attempt to resurrect the story of Waltz dying in Julia’s store (another fallacy), including the involvement of Frank Alkire (an honorable man of a noble pioneer family who deserves better).

The above information is posted in the hope that folks are not led down the same dead ends that many of us have already traveled, resulting in the loss of precious research time better spent elsewhere. It’s up to the reader to decide whether to use valid county records and newspaper accounts of the day, or whether to place their trust elsewhere.

Personally, I can forgive Ely’s honest mistake.


P.S. And in case anyone was wondering, the Arctic Soda Fountain stayed with Julia when Emil abandoned her. She was assessed for the soda fountain in the 1892 tax year in Maricopa County, when the fountain was valued at $700 (apparently depreciating 5 percent per year from time of purchase).

The part of the tale concerning Waltz helping Julia to pay her bills, including any balance due on the soda fountain, still appears possible, but think about everything stated above, including the purchase price and date for the fountain, if you decide to travel down that line. I think you’ll come to some interesting conclusions.

Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:01 pm
by Mrs.Oroblanco
A very interesting post - to be sure.

I know there are many versions of every version of every version - and, unfortunately, Feldman's old forum was not immune to that. (though I have enjoyed reading it all).

I'm not sure of your particular points - in other words, why you are making them. Where Julia was or wasn't, and who rented what from whom, is not really going to get you anywhere, imo.

However, actions do speak louder that words. Why would anyone go tramping out in the hills after a "treasure", if they didn't think there was a treasure? (I'm talking about Julia, in the first hand - and a lot of people I know - including me), on the second hand. (especially since Julia was scared to death of the desert).

I'm asking this simply to try to understand what your purpose is - to just straighten out known facts? Or to "debunk" the Waltz story?

Who leaves a prominent business to chase a legend if you don't have a reason to believe it? I don't think most people believe the soda fountain was all of what she (Julia) was in need of help with, but even if it was a thousand dollars, that is a ton of money back then. If you had pure gold back then, you got $20 an ounce if it was assayed, about $15-$18 if it wasn't. At $18.00 an ounce, that's about 56 ounces, which would be worth $71,500 today.

First, I would like to applaud your research efforts - back when we started, it was VERY difficult, having to go and spend hour after hour in libraries and other places. Even now it is time consuming, and I love real paper trails. Of course, it is not difficult for some people to weave some truths together with assumptions and untruths (either by mistake or otherwise), but, for the most part, paperwork doesn't lie.

I would still like your personal take on the whole business.


PS: I don't have too many friends who would give me $71,500, even if they had it :lol:

Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:20 pm
by Mrs.Oroblanco
By the way, Julia and Emil Thomas were divorced on October 7, 1891. (officially)


Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:06 pm
by Ozarker
Howdy Mrs O:

No, I don't have any particular point, or even a destination that I'm trying to reach.

I am certainly not trying to debunk Jacob Waltz or the LDM. I'm an enthusiast, but I am mainly interested in the historical side of the story and the people involved, and not so much about the location of any remaining gold. I lean toward the simplest version of the tale, but have healthy doubts about much of it. I tend to rely on documented sources whenever possible, but am realistic about the fact that not everything can be found on paper. I do have an intense and very strong dislike for invented history though, especially when good names are tarnished, because serious researchers have their hands full already, and many folks are no longer around to defend themselves. I am particularly fierce about falsified records being misrepresented and deposited with historical societies or similar organizations.

One of my reasons for responding to the lead-off post was simply to (try to) set a few things straight (again). It's not the first time this particular subject (the location of Julia's business) has been addressed, and Kraig Roberts knows that well. Given some time I'll wager it'll all come up again. If so, I hope somebody will see it for what it is and respond to it in kind. They can only do that if they know some of the basic facts, which is what I was trying to impart.

I know discussing primary source materials (like county records) isn't always interesting - in fact it can be downright tedious. It makes for boring reading and doesn't always hold the same interest as mysterious new material that seems to offer fresh information that nobody was previously aware of. The trouble is that the new information almost always comes from confidential and often unidentifiable sources that throw up a roadblock (and hopefully a red flag) for serious researchers.

Some folks simply accept these new stories and base their searches for the mine on these new but unsubstantiated "facts". Others end up losing valuable research time in trying to validate the new stories.

I suppose, hypothetically, a person could draw some conclusions about some elements of the LDM story based on what was written in the preceding posts. For example, several years ago now, a relatively new (and unsubstantiated) story emerged that Old Waltz had died on a cot in a little storage room in the back of Julia's store instead of in her home, and had given the deathbed revelations about his mine to Dick Holmes and Gideon Roberts in that little storage room. But not before Julia had allegedly created a spectacle of Waltz's nearing death, which spectacle was allegedly witnessed and documented by Frank Alkire (written in his own hand, no less). Elaborate details emerged about a set of stairs that led from Waltz's little storage room out into the adjoining alley, which Dick Holmes and Gideon Roberts used to get access to Waltz as his death approached. The trouble was, nobody had seen this alleged Alkire manuscript, and folks also simply took it for granted that the store Julia was doing business from was the one mistakenly identified in Sims Ely's book. Lo and behold, a check of the Sanborn Fire Insurance maps showed the store (misidentified by Ely) as having a little storage room in back - the ready-made perfect place to fit Old Waltz's cot - and it was indeed next to an alley (known as Cactus Way).

However, a meticulous check of the county records and various newspaper accounts led to the discovery that Julia's store was not in the location that Sims Ely had documented, and was instead located across the street in the Capitol Building owned by Lofus Goodrich. Another simple check of the Sanborn Fire Insurance maps revealed there was no alley giving access to the side of the store, and in fact there was no little storage room in the back of the store that would serve as the place for Old Waltz to die. Suddenly, all of the invented "history" that implicated Julia in some questionable behavior, and the words that had basically been put into Frank Alkire's mouth, was revealed for what it was - false history that had been recently invented by somebody for who knows what reason. A reasonable person would therefore tend to discount any information that came from this mysterious (and fake) Alkire manuscript, not to mention the entire tale of Waltz dying in Julia's store instead of her home.

As indicated in my initial response, I suspect the lead-off post is an attempt to salvage the story of Waltz dying in Julia’s store, but the only way to do that is to have Julia lease a store different from what she actually did. For some reason, it seems important to Mr Roberts to keep Julia in the store misidentified by Sims Ely, so much so that he is throwing out some of the right names, but confusing the issue with the wrong facts.

If folks take the time, documented and easily verifiable facts can help to rule out some of the more fantastical stories that seem to get rolled out from time to time, and can even help to correct some of the mistakes that the old-timers made. These facts may not point out which specific trail to take on the way to cleaning out what's left of Old Jake's mine, but they may be an indicator of what (or whose information) to base a search on.

As for my mention of the soda fountain - that was basically an unrelated set of information that I've been interested in for awhile. Don't read too much into it - it's just that the fountain cost $1000 brand new, and somewhere around 48 monthly payments would have been made on the fountain before Emil Thomas split town (assuming all the monthly payments were made on time). There's also a good possibility that there was a substantial down payment on the fountain when it was originally purchased, reducing any potential outstanding balance even more. And you are correct - the fountain was potentially only one element of Julia's total debt - but I doubt it was as significant as some people have made it. If a person wanted to get serious about how much Waltz potentially helped Julia, they would need to get her entire financial picture laid out before deciding whether that part of the tale makes sense, and if so to what extent. As indicated, I believe it is at least possible that Waltz helped Julia.

And BTW, Julia's divorce decree was actually October 6, 1891. See Maricopa County Records, Miscellaneous Book 4, Pages 519 thru 522.

Anyway, thanks for your input and questions! Best regards to you and Roy (I appreciated his insights on the Wasp Assay report posted by Kraig Roberts a couple of years back).


Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:27 pm
by Mrs.Oroblanco

Interesting - and I agree with most of your points - like I said, I was wondering if there was a particular method to your madness (we are all mad, us treasure hunters) - whether it was just a matter of historical accuracy or what. Like I said - I'm always duly impressed by someone who does homework, since - as you say - it can be tedious - though, personally, I have never found it boring. (but, like I said, we are all mad :lol: ).

The Arizona Republican, October 7th, 1891 (no.22) has mention that her divorce became final that day in the district court.
I would post a pic - but it doesn't seem to work.

News Happenings In and About Phoenix
Briefly Mentioned.
In the district court today Julia
Thomas' was awarded a divorce from her
husband E. W. Thomas

Sometimes, people intentionally mix true history in with fake for many reasons - notoriety, money, fake friendships - many reasons - and if they know their history fairly well, it is easy to mix fiction with truth, and make it all sound like truth. Perhaps you understand what I mean.


Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:47 pm
by Mrs.Oroblanco

Hope you don't mind, but, now I am now going to pick some questions, here and there - not all in one post, of course.

The first one would be - are you sure you mean the Capital Building? The first Capitol building was in Prescott, until 1889 - when it moved to Phoenix, into the old City Hall building (the city hall building at that time was only 2 years old). So, if someone were to say City Hall Building, they would still be talking about the same building. The building that was actually BUILT to be the Capitol Building started construction in 1898, so, we are definitely not talking about that one.

Also, the Sanbourn Fire Insurance Map of Phoenix has Thomas' Confectionary on the South side of Washington. (shrug) - across from City Hall. (1890), complete with an alley and a back room, and the back room actually backs up to the back street, block 22.

Ely actually interviewed Julia - so, I'm not really sure if he mis-remembered (he was quite along in years when he wrote it), or if Julia mis-remembered, as she got a little (sic) off the wall after a time. That's being "nice".


Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:17 pm
by oroblanco
A big HOWDY to our amigos Ozarker and my compliments on your excellent research. Thank you for sharing it.

I would only add that John D. Mitchell, also was among those who interviewed Julia and his version of the LDM story has her shop "across the street from City Hall".

Not to speak for Mrs O, but some people have been throwing up smokescreens about the Lost Dutchman for years, like the phony assay report and "altered" historical records ending up in non-fiction books, ruining the reputation of a highly respected author. I too take a very dim view of that practice, it is not harmless and we could even say it has led to deaths, or been a contributing factor. But I guess it is to be expected, especially in our day when you can find historical fiction books on the same shelves with history books in bookstores, and I wonder how many people realize that the historical fictions are still fictions, really don't belong with the history at all.

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek. I think this is a good idea to get (and set) the record straight, even though these points may not be major factors in the big picture.

Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 8:49 am
by StevenTrost
A lot of information to read for sure. Confuseing but in the end I don't think Ely lied as has been said here. He was specific about the location and the location is without doubt 21 E Washengton street on the south side of Washington street. I don't believe anyone ever said Julia Tomas ever owned that store or buliding or leased it. What was said was the business directories for phoenix 1891 show a Julia Thomas as the propriater of that specific location. Now what is a propriater? is it the owner, leaser. building owner ? I dont know. did she just run the store for someone else ?

we have Ely describing the exact location and Julia in that location by the 1891 business directory's. Somewhere there is more to this story and Ely must have known that story or he wuoldn't of been so specific about the location.

Blaming Ely and aclling him a liar and everything else under the sun is just plain childish. This is how he saw things and he had a right to print things as he saw or knew them or heard them to be.

Just my opinion on the matter.


Re: Emil and Julia Thomas Bakery

Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 10:01 am
by Matthew Roberts
OzarkerLarry posted,
Anyway, thanks for your input and questions! Best regards to you and Roy (I appreciated his insights on the Wasp Assay report posted by Kraig Roberts a couple of years back).

Don't know but if OzarkerLarry and in a later post by oroblanco are refering to me as Kraig Roberts. I did not post any assay reports. You obviously have someone(s) mixed up. Just to set the record straight.