There probably never was an E. G. Hill rose called 'Indiana'—I can find no mention of such a rose in the E.G. Hill catalogs of the time, nor in any catalogs at all until the next decade... after an American rose nursery decided that 'William Soupert' had been introduced in the U.S. as 'Indiana' (a notion I can't find any references to support).

I don't know if the rose sold by Bobbink and Atkins (and other nurseries?) from 1916 on as 'Indiana' was 'Rosalind Orr English' or 'William Soupert' or possibly another rose. The named roses were both offspring of 'Mme Abel Chatenay' and may have resembled each other.

The 1907 Journal des Roses reference that gave rise to the myth of E. G. Hill's 'Indiana has an illustration of a bright red rose with a written description of a light pink climbing rose called 'Indiana' that was already a familiar sight in French gardens at the time of the article. The illustration is probably of 'Rosalind Orr English'. A few issues before that one, a writer for JdR noted that they were relying on other horticultural publications for their descriptions of roses from Anglophone countries because the catalogs the editors had received were not in French. It seems that what should have been a nice write-up of E. G. Hill's new rose, 'Rosalind Orr English' turned out badly because the information they received was not in French.

E.G. Hill was located in Richmond, Indiana. In 1907, they introduced two roses: 'Richmond' and 'Rosalind Orr English". Someone who wasn't fluent in English could have looked at the E.G. Hill press release for the new roses, and guessed that the rose that wasn't 'Richmond' must be 'Indiana'?