The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-03-10
THE OTHER SlDF.
.Cop ala HOusei Files an Answer AID
Cross Petition
In the Legal Controversy Betweeu Him
and His Partner, Mr.. Haymaker-.other
Important Matters In Court.

Important Matters In court.
In the case Of Edward l.. Haymaker
against Hiram H. Housed, the defendant,
Captain Housel, by his attorneys, Housel
and webber, has filed an answer and
cross petition. He acknowledges the part
nt rship and states that there was no time
fixed as to when the partnership should
cease. He states that they bought and sold
horses and that this account was kept sep.
arate from the livery business accounts in
order that they might determine profit or
loss on this branch of the business, and
that the balance in favor Of the firm on
these transactions was always placed on
the firms books. Housed states further
that during the continuance OF their busi-
ness he has contributed to the capital of
the firm, less S20.34 drawn out, the sum Of
about S10,9O0. During the same time he
states that Haymaker has contributed the
sum OF S7,S52 and has drawn out not less
than $500. He states further that Hay
maker is in default in the keeping of his
partnership agreement in that he has not
contributed his equal share, 5000 and
more. Housed says he has putin money
to maintain the credit OF the firm, Hay
maker continued to draw money out re-
gardless OF co sequences. Housed admits
that he hos had the management of the
books, but says that Haymaker was inefn
cient, and that when he, Housed, would
be out OF the city Haymaker would take
charge of the books which were always in
n
He says that on account OF Haymaker's
carelessness errors were made In keeping
accounts. 1t is alleged by Housed that he
has discovered vouchers amounting to
s2,4cO, drawn to pay Haymaker's in
dividual indebtedness, one half OF which
vouchers we're paid by the firm. Housed
says he is i'll and Is at Atlantic City, N. j.
and will not be able to attend to business
for some time. During his illness he
states that 1t has been discovered that
Haymaker signed the firms name to q
note for S73o for money borrowed by Hay
m aker, and 1t is stated that horses were
purchased with the money and no ac-
counting made to Housed of the trans
action. 1t is also alleged in the cross
petition that since Houseps illness Hay
maker took two horses from the firms
farm at Middllebranch and sold them and
has made no accounting OF the amount
received for them. The allegation is also
made that Housed frequently warned Hay.
maker not to draw 80 heavily from the
FIRMS funds as it took all the money to
run the business, but Haymaker
would not listen, and to save the
credit of the firm Housed was
obliged to put in his own individual funds
in order TO save the firms credit. Housed
alleges that the firm 10 in debt TO the ex-
tent of Sl3 600, and that the assets will pay
all claims il properly applied or nearly SO.
The cross petition asks for the appoint
meDt of receiver who shall appraise the
property aud sell II as whole.
A COMPLICATED CASE.
A complicated case has been filed in
common pleas court by attorneys James
Rice and A. A. Thayer for their client,
Anna Fisher. The defendants in the
case are Joseph w. Burger and John j.
Zaiser, the latter the assignee OF David l..
Hnusley. The controversy Is concerning
property left by Levi Housley deceased.
The property consists of l60 acres OF land
in Lawrence township. The petition
AYERS that the plaintiff, Anna Fisher, Is
one of the heirs at law of Levi Housley,
deceased, and that she, together with the
other heirs, transferred their interests to
the management of David L. Housley,
one of the defendants in the action. Hous'
ley became embarrast ed in financial mat
ters, and il is alleged that when he made
an assignment to ZAiser, he transferred
also the property of the heirs.
Zaiser, In turn, according to the
averments of the petition sold
the property to Joseph Burgert for
the consideration of SLICES. OF this
amount IL is stated that s., 1854 still remains
unpaid. On this sum the plaintiff, Anna
Fisher claims "a lien as her dower,amount-
ing to 81 800 and more. She desires toget
back her money which is alleged to be
now in the hands Of Burgert and asks that
IL he refuses to pay it,the property be sold
and the proceeds applied to the satisfac-
ton of the claim.
WANTS HIS WARDS MONEY.
Mong & McCarty have commenced an
action In common pleas court for their
client David B. Bachtel, guardian OF Henry
Goodenberger an imbecile. In this action
David B. Day, assignee of David b Bach
tel Is made defendant. The plaintiff
states that by reason of his appointment
as guardian of Henry Goodenberger, he
came into possession Of ready funds, the
same being the property OF his guardian,
and that he invested a portion OF the
funds in his own business. He met with
business reverses and was obliged to make
an assignment, the defendant David B.
Day, being chosen assignee. He states
that he has presented bill TO the assignee
asking for S628 %, the same belonging TO
his ward. Day, IL is alleged, has refused
10 give up the amount, and plaintiff now
brings suit to recover the same Tor his
ward. .G
HELD UNDER ADvIsEMENr.
Judge Mccarthy this morning heard the