The Monitor-register., 1897-04-09
Tne Aerner-P et,tt case.

Mr.. EDIToR:-In your following issue,
af ter you published a simple statement,
without any comments, announcing that
Chancellor McGill had rendered me a
final award OF $678 G5 in my suit brought
to recover from Kerner and F. Petit,
the balance due me from the books of
Indiaman5 and Laneewood, which | had
voluntarily turned over to them in 1887
| noted an article from their lawyer,
Hilliard, wherein after induiging iu
another of bis CHARACTERISTIC inuendoes,
regarding my management of and
charges for keeping said horses, which
we're fully proven, as being just what we
always paid elsewhere for like service, he,
boy-lIke, endeavors to prove to the pub
lie that his clients secured the larger
slices of the cake, l was compelled to
make them di sgorge by %TenouDcing my
award, less the eoult charges, also
awarded me and giving their gross
awards, from which bad he been more
candid he should assuredly have de-
Quoted the entire court charges and
printing bills they had to pay ont.
Again in his weeks South ~JerSegm0n
he endeavors to show that Kerner and
Frank Petit furnished the capital aud
that | or the receiving end got most of
the profits and in order to do 80 makes it
| appear thai I got instead of $481 10, as
! announced with You, a total of 1857 rs.
| against Frank Pettit's total OF 1896 rs.
Now while | much prefer trespassing
no further upon yOur good nature and
valuable space, billiards. evident desire
to mislead many who through all these
years have eVinced q great interest in the
| outcome of this matter, seems to demand
a brief summary Of th6 most important
testimony brought out during the tlisl,
FROM which your readers may judge, both
| the case and iIlllard's motives in the
matter.
During the trial it was f1lly proven
1St, That Lsueewood returned from my
place to his owner a much improved and
far Ii ore profitable horse than when he
retired to my stables.
81, That Indiaman, who returned bis
owner no profit The hse years he man
aged him prior TO my taking him and did
not pay exp euses 10 Frank Pottit's hands
the season of 1881, paid well during all
The four seasons | had him earning about
So, 600 during the last four months / had
him and returning to lis owner July .,
1887, fully as good as when | received
him in 1884, and apparently upon the
threshold of a prosperous career, as
Kerner and T. Pe5tit doubtless thought,
but regarding whose subsequent earnings,
under their own management, neither
could recall anything whatever on the
witness stand
81, Frank PetJit's letters aud receipts
10 evidence showed that during the four
Years he was interested with me that he
advanced only $106 toward a total of
$500 l paid the first four months of 1884
for maintaining the horses in Salem that
he reimbursed himself $50 of that from
the first fees coming due the next season,
and that l paid him tue balance of the
$106 at our next settlement; neither he or
Kermer ever afterwards advanced a sin
gle penny for account of the horses
in my care, yet billiards. statements
shows that up to July 8 1887. when the
partnership dissolved, Frank Pettit's net
profits would have been just $796 rs.
Can Hilliard recall a better paying in
vestment without a dollar invested, o
responsibility, the principal living and
doing business all the while in another
state ? And yet he says he don't under
stand why l hoped to do even better by
terminatiDgsa partnership wherein in ad
dition to paying the waer one half my
receipts, | mas compelled to divide every
dollar with a parry who could return mo
nothing J i
Had these parties chossn different
methods there would have resulted to
them from the earnings TO July 3, 1887, a
balance of 81. 29T 42. now they have after
allowing simple interest. our charges,
and lawyer fees. probably less than $500
for division.
Truly foolish man build fac houses
and wise men live therein"
April l, 1897. CLARK PETIT,
The famous Wilkes Mambrino Fatchsn