Contra Costa County

History

SOURCE:  The History of Contra Costa County, California - published by The Elms Publishing Co., Inc., Berkeley, California, 1917

 

CHAPTER XVI

EARLY CRIMINAL HISTORY

 
 
            The People vs. Wempett and Wampett. - On September 28, 1850, two Indians named Wempett and Wampett were found guilty of manslaughter by a jury, and sentenced to pay a fine of one dollar and two weeks' imprisonment, but who their victim was, or what were the circumstances of the case, the records do not divulge.
            Murder of Aparicio Morales. - On May 29, 1852, Jose Antonio, an Indian, stabbed Aparicio Morales at or near the residence of Doctor Tennent in Pinole, from the effects of which Morales died. Antonio was duly tried before C. P. Hester, district judge, found guilty July 9, 1852, and sentenced to be hanged. He was executed August 20, 1852. He was hanged from the limb of a sycamore tree in the suburbs of the village of Martinez. A barrel was placed in an old cart, and the condemned man required to stand on that ticklish foundation while the rope was adjusted.  The cart was finally driven away, and the poor fellow tumbled off the barrel and into eternity.
             Killing of Ignacio Flores, alias Figaro. - The victim in this case was killed at a place known as the "Chicken Ranch," on October 30, 1853. He came to his death by severe wounds from knife and pistol at the hands of Miguel Nabaro, his wife Antonia and Rafael Soto being apprehended as accessories to the act. On trial the accessory Antonia was discharged, but there is no record of what became of the others.
             Murder of James M. Gordon. - The particulars of this deed were communicated to a Stockton newspaper by Doctor Marsh at the time of its occurrence. About seven o'clock in the evening of October 2, 1854, three men came to the house of J. M. Gordon, near Doctor Marsh's, and desired him to give them directions about the road, saying that they had lost their way. As soon as Gordon went to his door, he was shot by one of the party; another of them fired at him also, but missed him. One of the balls struck Gordon, inflicting a mortal wound. Gordon fled in the darkness, and with difficulty reached Doctor Marsh's house, about two miles distant. The object of the ruffians was undoubtedly robbery, as the house was found to be ransacked. The men were traced and ultimately arrested in San Francisco. They were Henry H. Monroe, Andrew Hollenstein, and Thomas Addison. Monroe was duly tried for murder, convicted and hanged November 24, 1854. While awaiting his execution Addison attempted his rescue, for which he was indicted by the Grand Jury, and imprisoned, but on January 20, 1855, made his escape from jail and has never been captured. The other accomplice, Hollenstein, was handed over to the custody of the sheriff of Solano County in the same month.
            Killing of Terrence H. McDonald. - It appears that on June 11, 1856, Rafael, an Indian, and Isabel, an Indian squaw, stabbed Terrence H. McDonald on the right side of the neck, from which he died instantly, the deed becoming committed in his own dwelling. September 5, 1856, they were convicted of manslaughter, the man sentenced to ten years and the woman to eighteen months imprisonment in the State prison. There was also an accomplice, who was discharged.
            Murder of Doctor John Marsh. - Perhaps no more horrible crime than the murder of this pioneer can be found in the pages of any history, and certainly no better example of justice following the guilty than that which tracked one of the murderers to punishment eleven years after the commission of his foul deed. Doctor Marsh had been for many years  - long before the American occupation of California - the owner of the Los Meganos Rancho, of which he became possessed, as we have elsewhere stated, by purchase, in the year 1837. Here he dwelt, surrounded by his people, flocks and herds, for full two decades. On or about the 24th of September, 1856, business called him from his farm to Martinez, some thirty miles distant. In the gray dawn of the following morning his horse and buggy were found in the town of Martinez, but without an occupant. Then followed the search, which led to the discovery of his body in a roadside ditch, immediately upon which the pursuit of the murderers was undertaken. On the day following Jose Antonio Olivas was captured; after making confession as to certain money found in his possession, taken from the body of the murdered victim, and implicating Felipe Moreno as principal in the deed, he was tried and convicted, but, escaping from jail, he eluded justice for more than ten years. In September, 1866, he was recaptured in Santa Barbara County, and brought to Contra Costa to await his trial. About the same time Felipe Moreno was taken in Sacramento, where he was going under the alias of Don Castro. When arrested he made desperate efforts to escape, but being mastered was quickly handcuffed and incarcerated. The third party implicated in the terrible murder, Juan Garcia, has up to the present time eluded justice. The trial of Felipe Moreno for the murder of Doctor Marsh was commenced on Saturday, September 23, 1867, and on the following Thursday the jury brought a verdict of murder in the second degree against the prisoner. The principal and only positive witness for the prosecution on this trial was Jose Antonio Olivas, one of the three persons indicted for the murder. Separate trials for the prisoners had been procured by District Attorney Mills, with the purpose of using the testimony of Olivas for the State and corroborating it, as to material points, by that of unimpeachable and disinterested witnesses. The defense relied mainly upon being able to prove an alibi; but notwithstanding the very able efforts of the counsel for the prisoner, M. S. Chase, of Martinez, the testimony failed to convince the jury, as the verdict shows, although it was not as severe as might have been expected, possibly because of the youth of the prisoner, and the doubt remaining as to whether he may have been the principal actor in the perpetration of the murder, or merely an accessory. The story of the Doctor's death, as told by Olivas, is as follows: "On the morning of September 24, 1856, the date of the murder, Jose Antonio Olivas and Felipe Moreno, aged twenty-five and nineteen years respectively, in company with some females, came into the village of Martinez, where, having attended church, they proceeded to Pinole, returning from there between four and five o'clock that same evening. They almost immediately continued their journey to Pacheco alone, and when reaching the hill about a mile from Martinez paused a while to await the arrival of one Garcia, who was expected to meet them.  Olivas then went on ahead for about two hundred yards, when he was overtaken by his comrades, and the three urged their horses into a gallop. While so proceeding they met a man named Swanson. Not long after this circumstance Doctor Marsh was observed to be coming in his buggy. Hereupon he was accosted by Olivas, who asked him for certain money due him for services as a vaquero, to which the Doctor replied that he would be paid on his return from San Francisco, but that he had no money with him then. The deceased now rode away, while the party remained behind and concocted a scheme to kill him, but finally arranged that he should only be robbed. They then followed in pursuit, and on overtaking their victim, Olivas, by Moreno's orders, seized the Doctor's horse by the head, while Moreno jumped into the buggy and Garcia stood guard alongside. The deceased at once faced his enemy and said, "Do you want to kill me?" to which he received the reply, "No," from Olivas, and "Yes"  from Moreno, and, notwithstanding the dissuasions of his companions, this youthful fiend slashed the unfortunate man in the face with a knife. He was then dragged out of the vehicle and fell to the ground, being before, however, wounded in the hand; Olivas having then dismounted, as he says, for the purpose of assisting the Doctor, who came toward and struck at him, a scuffle ensued, Olivas crying to Moreno to free him. Thereupon Moreno observed, "Why should I let go this old cabron?" and forthwith stabbed his prostrate victim in the side. Upon receiving this wound the Doctor cried aloud, when Moreno was prepared to repeat the operation, but was pushed away by Olivas, who parried a cut made at him. The Doctor now attempted to rise, but was only able to stagger a short distance and fell into a ditch dead. His pockets were then rifled by Garcia and Moreno, who afterward cut his throat, the deed being witnessed by Olivas from his saddle. This terrible crime being perpetrated, the triumvirate repaired to some houses for the night and afterward fled, and for ten years and upward escaped the iron hand of the law. Moreno was sentenced to imprisonment for life in the State prison on November 29, 1867.
            Murder of Nicholas Brenzel. - A most atrocious murder was committed near the San Domingo Rancho on May 21, 1859. A man named John Mohr was accused of killing Nicholas Brenzel by striking him with a scythe, and was duly arrested in Martinez. From the testimony of the wife of the deceased, it would appear that Brenzel and Mohr, who were both Germans, were engaged during the year in cultivating a ranch together. Mohr owed Brenzel several hundred dollars borrowed money, and Brenzel asked him if he would not pay a portion of it, as he wished to purchase some grain-sacks. On Mohr's refusal to let his partner have any money, Brenzel replied that he would go to San Francisco, borrow the money there, and purchase the sacks on his own account. This conversation took place in the house on the morning of the crime. A few minutes afterward the wife of Brenzel heard a cry of distress, and on going to the door saw Mohr with a scythe-blade in his hand, and near by was the prostrate and bleeding form of her husband. She asked Mohr why he had killed her husband. He replied, "I did it because I wanted to," and then threw down the scythe, seized a spade, and endeavored to strike the dying man again.
             Killing of an Unknown Man. - At an early hour on the morning of October 13, 1859, several citizens living in the vicinity of Lafayette missed their saddles, and it was at once conjectured that horse-theives had visited the neighborhood, several horses having been stolen from that district a week previously. The alarm was given, and in a very short time a party of six or eight citizens started out and soon got on the trail of the supposed plunderers, those in pursuit being guided by fresh tracks of horses. The trail led across the hills in the direction of San Ramon Valley, crossing it about a mile on the west side of Alamo, and thence toward Mount Diablo. They proved to the Mexicans who had picketed their horses and encamped on the ground close by, having with them saddles belonging to David Carrick and Homer Shuey. They were suddenly surprised by their pursuers and ordered to surrender, a command to which they paid no attention, but endeavored to make their escape. They were fired upon by the citizens, when one of their number fell mortally wounded, having been shot through the head. The other two took to the chaparral, but as  soon as they became aware that the pursuing party was endeavoring to capture them at all hazards the rascals came out of the bush and gave themselves up. The wounded man was conveyed to the Walnut Creek House, where he died the same night. He was a Mexican, apparently about twenty-five years of age, and on his body was found a letter from the noted desperado, Tiburcio Vasquez, dated from the State prison at San Quentin, and bearing the superscription, "Sra. Dona Guadalupe Cantua - by the hand of S. T. Bsa,"
who the victim doubtless was.
            Killing of Edward Norris. - This tragedy took place at Conkling's Hotel, on the road between Lafayette and Oakland, on the evening of December 11, 1859. The particulars, as gleaned from the Contra Costa Gazette, are as follows: A. H. Houston, of San Francisco, was the owner of some five hundred acres of the Sobrante claim, on the San Pablo Creek. The property had been squatted on by settlers, with all of whom, save one, Mr. Houston had comprised, so as to obtain full possession. On December 10th Houston went over to his ranch for the purpose of making some arrangement toward a peaceable settlement of the dispute. He visited the house of Mr. Norris on Sunday, the 11th, but not finding the latter at home, left a request that he would on his return call at his (Houston's) farm-house and have a talk with him before the hour necessary to start to take the last boat that was to leave Oakland. Houston then returned to his house, and, after waiting as long as possible, he left word with his father-in-law, W. C. Pease, who was in charge of the property, to settle the matter peacefully, by paying Norris a reasonable sum to leave quietly. Norris, however, did not come to the house, and in the evening Pease went over to the hotel near by, kept by Conkling, for the purpose of getting supper. While eating, a crowd of men arrived at the hotel, among whom was Norris. They were in the bar-room while Pease was in the dining-room. The conversation of Norris and his friends was upon the matter in dispute between the former and Houston. Pease, hearing his name mentioned in not very complimentary terms, stepped to the door of the apartment in which Norris and the others were conversing, and, drawing a pistol, demanded to know who had anything to say against "Old Pease, at the same time raising his pistol, cocking it, and threatening to shoot the first man who raised a finger. Norris, who was in the act of drinking as Pease entered, put down his glass on the table; some harsh words then passed between Pease and Norris; the latter, who was unarmed, reached forward to seize the pistol, when Pease instantly fired, and Norris fell dead, having been shot through the heart. Pease was tried for manslaughter and on January 26, 1861, was acquitted.
            Killing of Sadello Catiyo. - During a drunken brawl at the house of Jose Silva, in Rodeo Valley, on the night of May 10, 1860, a Chileno named Sadello Catiyo, was killed by his countryman, Assesso Gayarado.
            Murder of Guadalupe Tapia. - Guadalupe Tapia, a Mexican, was mortally wounded  with a knife on July 4, 1860, by Ramon Ruiz. They were seen together near Alamo, each having a horse, though dismounted, and just previous to the attack deceased was observed to be reclining on the ground holding his animal by his bridle. Ruiz now suddenly rushed upon him with a knife, inflicting a terrible wound in the abdomen, from the effects of which he died a few hours later. The murderer was arrested, but at his trial, which took place January 16, 1861, he was discharged, the jury disagreeing, there being eleven in favor of conviction of murder in the first degree and one for manslaughter.
            Killing of N. Nathan. - The Gazette of February 15, 1862, says: "The body of N. Nathan was found near Pinole a few days since, much decayed." The verdict of the inquest was that he had been robbed and murdered. His license as a peddler bore date about the middle of December, 1861. He was aged about twenty-one years and had no relatives in California.
            Killing of Patrick Finnegan. - On the evening of November 30, 1862, Patrick Finnegan was shot at Clayton, under the following circumstances: It would appear that a troupe of minstrels gave a performance at the Clayton House in the evening to a rather noisy audience. At its conclusion one of the company was somewhat roughly handled by certain parties present, and R. L. Bradley handed him a pistol, telling him to protect himself. He did not use it, but returned it soon afterward. One account of the affair was that in passing the pistol back it was accidentally discharged; while another eye-witness stated positively that on receiving it Bradley willfully shot Finnegan. The ball struck deceased on the left side of his nose, passing into the head and killing him instantly. Bradley mounted a horse and made his escape.
             Killing of James Magee. - On December 1, 1862, James Magee was shot and killed by James Tice. There had been a difficulty between the parties, and in the afternoon in question Tice, who had been drinking, went to the ranch of the deceased, and some hard words passed between them. Tice at length wished to shake hands, to which Magee objected, telling him he was drunk, and ordering him off the premises. Magee had a shot-gun in his hand at the time, which he had gone into the house for. He turned as if to leave the spot, when Tice presented his pistol and shot him in the left side. He exclaimed, "Oh, I'm a dead man sure!" and almost immediately expired. Tice mounted his horse, rode to Martinez, and put himself in the custody of the sheriff. Deceased owned a valuable ranch in the Moraga Valley, and had accumulated a handsome property. Tice was duly tried before Hon. S. F. Reynolds, district judge, May 30, 1863, when a jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
            Murder of Louis D'Alencon. - On the night of Thursday, or the morning of Friday, March 12-13, 1863, Louis D'Alencon, the keeper of the Valley House near Martinez, was murdered by some person or persons unknown. The last that was seen of the deceased alive was on Thursday night by the hired man, an old friend and fellow countryman who lodged with him, when, having shut up the house, they partook of a drink together before retiring for the night, the man then going to bed leaving D'Alencon in the bar-room, where he was in the frequent habit of sitting up all night engaged in writing, he being a regular correspondent of the French newspapers in San Francisco. The companion soon fell asleep and was not disturbed by any unusual noise, but thought that there had been such he would have noticed it, as he was used to D'Alencon's habit of being up and moving about all night. At a very early hour on Friday morning, Pancho Flores, passing the Valley House on the way to a rodeo, noted the door ajar, and saw the body of D'Alencon lying on the floor between it and the bar. Pancho tried to enter, but was unable to open the door wide enough on account of the position in which the inanimate form lay. He therefore went around to the back of the house, awoke the hired man, and asked him what drunken man was asleep in the bar. The two then went to ascertain, and were horrified to find D'Alencon stretched on his back on the floor, dead, and weltering in his blood.
            Murder of an Unknown Man. - A stranger, dressed in working clothes, arrived at San Pablo on the night of August 4, 1863, and, after eating supper at the hotel, took his blanket and proceeded a short distance up the road, when he turned off into a wheat-field, spread his bedding, and lay down. The following morning he was found there quite dead, with a wound in the temple, apparently caused by a blow from a heavy instrument. The body was yet warm when discovered.
            Killing of John Pete. - On January 11, 1864, one Frank McCann killed John Pete in a quarrel over a game of cards at San Pablo, but what the particulars were we have been unable to gather.
            Murder of Martine Berryessa. - On February 8, 1864, at the town of Old Pinole, Martine Berryessa was stabbed with a knife by a man who was known by the solitary name of Francisco. Death was almost instantaneous. The facts of the case are these: Some two or three weeks before hard words had passed between the parties, and a charge of horse-stealing was bandied from one to the other. Thereupon a scruffle ensued, in which a cut was received in the leg by Francisco. They then separated, after threats were made by Francisco, and they did not cross each other again until the day of the fatal meeting, when Francisco and two men with him were for some hours at Pinole. Just as they were about leaving, they saw Berryessa,  and, going up to him, Francisco observed that somebody wanted him at a place nearby. Berryessa refused to go with them, whereupon he was told he should be made to go, and Francisco drew a pistol upon him. He held up his hands as if to ward off the shot or to seize the weapon, and then, instead of firing the pistol, Francisco unsheathed a knife and stabbed him under the arm. It entered his back immediately below the shoulder, penetrating the lungs, and causing him to fall dead. The murderer and his two companions then fled. Francisco being caught by the bystanders, after a short chase, was lodged in the jail at Martinez.
            Murder of Aravena. - On June 17, 1864, a Chileno named Aravena was killed under the following circumstances: It seems for some unexplained reason, he attacked a man named Humboldt, a resident of Oakland, Alameda County, who, in self-defense, turned on the deceased and slew him.
             Murder of a Man Named "Jo." - In the month of June, 1874, but on what day we cannot ascertain, a man called "Jo" was stabbed by one Alvarez at Pinole. The cause was liquor and jealousy. Alvarez delivered himself up to the authorities, but was discharged.
             Murder of Jesus Diana. - The following murder was committed November 12, 1864, under the most vengeful and brutal circumstances. It appears that a Mexican by the name of Luis Romero had been living in a family of the same nationality a few miles from Pinole. In that household was included a young woman about sixteen years old, the sister of the mistress of the house. The young girl's name was Jesus Diana. Romero was courting her and was very anxious to marry her. She, however, refused all his solicitations, whereat he was very much incensed. Immediately after breakfast, on the morning of the fatal day he took his gun and started off, as he said, on a hunting trip. Only a few moments passed, however, before he came back to the house and found the married sister outside at a well near by. The murdered girl was within, washing dishes. He then went in and stabbed her in the back with a common butcher knife. Her screams quickly brought the absent sister to the door. Upon the latter crying out to Romero to desist, he turned upon her too, with the same knife, when she ran away.  He called to her not to be afraid, for he should kill himself also. He then went back, took the gun, put it to his own throat, holding it under the chin so that the charge would pass into his brain, and thus killed himself. Before doing so, however, he stabbed the girl in several places, one of the wounds going entirely through the body.
             Murder of Valencia. - On August 25, 1866, a Mexican, or native Californian, named Valencia, died at Martinez from the effects of a wound received at the hands of Jesus Garcia, on the previous Tuesday. It is said there was no provocation for the assault, although some quarrel had occurred between the parties. The attack was made with a stick or club of oak wood, with which the deceased was severely beaten upon the head and other parts of the body. Garcia was arrested, tried, and on December 27th sentenced by District Judge Dwinelle to imprisonment for two years in the State prison.
             Murder of Mrs. Elizabeth Robinson. - The following most brutal murder was committed on the night of December 26, 1866, on the person of Mrs. Elizabeth Robinson, an aged woman who dwelt in the vicinity of the Roman Catholic Church. The facts of the case as alleged are these: The body of the deceased was discovered lying upon the floor by the child of a neighbor some time during the forenoon of Thursday, the 27th, and upon this information a number of persons immediately repaired to the premises and found the body in a night-dress upon the floor of the rear room, with the head, face, arms and hands fearfully cut and gashed and several stabs in the breasts and throat, one of the latter being entirely through the neck, from front to back. Near the body was a piece of candle and a candlestick. The appearances led to the belief that the deceased, aroused by the noise made in entering the house, had risen from her bed, lighted the candle. and on entering the rear room from which the noise proceeded received a severe blow upon the forehead, followed by assaults with the knife, against which the  gashes upon the arms and hands showed that she made a protracted but unavailing struggle. The floor of the house displayed bloody tracks, and upon one of the partitions was the full print of a bloody hand, made by the murderer probably on groping his way through the dark. There were also the marks of bloody fingers on the sliding window, showing that he had carefully closed it on his retreat from the premises. The object of the murder was undoubtedly plunder, as the deceased, who was about seventy-five years of age, by a long life of toil, had accumulated some property, and may have been supposed to have money with her in the house, which had all the appearances of having been searched after the life of the woman had been taken. Two days later a mixed-blood Mexican and Indian, called Manuel Juarez, was arrested under circumstances that tended strongly to identify him with the murder, several of the articles belonging to Mrs. Robinson having been found in his house in Martinez. He was duly incarcerated, and, after a trial lasting an entire week, was found guilty of murder, the testimony against him being entirely circumstantial, but most conclusive. On May 10, 1867, he was sentenced to be hanged on June 28th, on which day he was executed at the jail at Martinez. Before the carrying out of the sentence, in response to a notice that he was at liberty to say anything he might desire to communicate before execution, in substance he remarked: "In a few minutes I shall be in the presence of my God, and I now declare that I am innocent of the crime for which I am to die; and what I have previously confessed I did in the hope of escaping punishment."
            Killing of Sacramento Leibas. - On the evening of January 7, 1867, Sacramento Leibas was shot and fatally wounded by Antonio Figueroa in the Pastor House, a saloon and boarding-house in Pacheco, and principally patronized by native Californians. A difficulty had existed between the parties for some time, and several weeks before deceased complained of Figueroa for threats against his life, but the evidence submitted to Justice of the Peace Sayles, before whom the case was brought, did not warrant placing him under bonds. On the evening of the killing three men came into the saloon together, Bonifacio Pacheco, Espirito Almosan, and Antonio Figueroa, all somewhat under the influence of liquor. Figueroa commenced to abuse Leibas, who replied, "It's all right; I don't want any words." He then directed his conversation to Antonio Leibas, brother of the deceased, in the same strain, and finally the remainder of those present came in for a share of his vituperation. After a while he went out, but soon returned, followed by Pacheco, who was apparently endeavoring to hold his arm. Figueroa raised a pistol, pointed it at Sacramento Leibas, who was standing behind the counter, and fired, the ball taking effect near the heart of the unfortunate man, who died in about an hour and a half. Notwithstanding being pursued, Figueroa escaped. Pacheco and Almosan were arrested as accessories, and after examination were discharged for want of evidence. They were subsequently rearrested and lodged in jail at Martinez. Figueroa was traced to a point on the San Joaquin, near Firebaugh's Ferry, where it is supposed he obtained a crossing in a boat kept there by a party of Sonorans. The accessories were found not guilty May 18th and discharged.
            Killing of Peter Lynch. - It appears from the records that some time previous to the committing of this deed a Portuguese named Antonio Corquillo had been in the employ of Peter Lynch, who resided on San Pablo Creek. On a certain Saturday evening in the month of March, 1867, a bottle of liquor was taken to the cabin where both men lived, and both becoming intoxicated a quarrel ensued. The Portuguese finally went to his bed, but was soon after assailed by Lynch. A struggle ensued, and in self-defense Corquillo seized a monkey-wrench from a tool-chest near by and dealt Lynch a fatal blow. He made a full confession, surrendered himself to the authorities, and on May 11, 1867, was tried and acquitted.
             Killing of Enoch J. Davis. - One of the proprietors of the Cumberland house, at the Black Diamond Coal Mines, named Enoch J. Davis, died March 1, 1867, from the effects of a knife wound inflicted by William Bowen some ten days prior to the decease. From the testimony given at the inquest it appears that Bowen and another party got into a quarrel over a game of cards and were ordered by Davis to go out of the house and settle their difficulty; they accordingly went out, and after a scuffle returned, still disputing, when Davis again ordered them away to fight the matter out, at the same time applying some derogatory epithets to Bowen, upon which he ran to his room and returned with a knife, asking Davis if he had called him a "son of ______," and upon Davis replying that he did, plunged the knife into his breast; then going back to the room, in which there were several other lodgers, threw the bloody weapon on the table and declared he would take the life of any man who called him such a name. Davis's wound was not at first thought to be mortal, and Bowen remained at the place until within a few days of his victim's death, when he left.
             Killing of William Nesbit. - The circumstances of this case are from the dying deposition of the victim. The murder was committed near Somersville on the night of December 21, 1866. On that night, a difficulty having originally occurred between Nesbit and George Vernon, he (Nesbit) went to the house of Vernon for the purpose of settling the difficulty without further trouble. Stopping at Vernon's door, he told them that he wished to talk with him peaceably and settle their difficulty without further words. Vernon said, "All right; wait until I get my boots and I will come and talk with you. Vernon went into the house and returned instantly with a pistol, and while Nesbit was sitting on the porch fired at him, the ball striking him in the breast. As he jumped to run he again shot him in the back. He also fired other shots which did not strike him. On April 24, 1867, Vernon was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment in the State prison. In 1871 he was pardoned, the grounds given by Governor Haight for so doing being: "There are serious doubts of his guilt, and it is the opinion of many of the citizens of said {Contra Costa} county that he should not have been convicted, and these doubts seem well founded."
             Killing of S. A. Carpenter. - On September 30, 1868, S. A. Carpenter, an old and well-known resident of Alamo, was found dead in a trail leading over a ridge to his residence, about two hundred yards from where the body was discovered. His horse, all saddled, had been previously found roaming about, the circumstance which led to the search. The deceased was in his shirt-sleeves, as if only a temporary absence was intended. He had been shot through the body, the ball entering the right side just below and behind the arm, and coming out of the right side a short distance below the nipple. There was no apparent deflection in its course, and, passing about an inch below the heart, produced death almost instantaneously. From its evident force, the ball was thought to have been discharged from a rifle or heavy revolver. His pantaloons were also cut in the folds on the left side, apparently by a ball that had passed clear of the body. Carpenter is described as a man of very eccentric disposition. He was unmarried, and lived alone in a little spot that he had surrounded with a wealth of floral beauty. Shrubs of various kinds were artistically trained in the most attractive style, and flowers of countless hues unfolded in beauty and mingled their fragrance around his humble dwelling. His house was a model of neatness and order that would have won ecomiums from the most thrifty housewife, and the general aspect of the place gave evidence of the esthetic traits of its possessor. Some little time before, Carpenter gave unmistakable proof of insanity, and was for a time removed to Stockton; after his return he had not been generally regarded as of sound mind. He was very irritable, and disposed to be quarrelsome toward his neighbors and all others with whom he came in contact. He had made threats to poison stock, and in many ways made enemies. Possibly some one unaware of, or unwilling to allow for his infirmity, may have compassed his death in revenge for injuries received at his hands. Be that as it may - the murderer made his escape.
             Killing of Mrs. Laura Walker. - A man named Walker, who lived on the farm of Mr. Sellers, near the Kirker Pass, on the Nortonville side, was arrested on September 5, 1869, for causing the death of his wife by beating her. Both the accused and deceased are reported to have been  indulging excessively in drink at the house of a neighbor, and the beating occurred on the way home. On November 30, 1870, Walker was convicted of man-slaughter, when a motion was made for a new trial, which was denied, and the prisoner sentenced to ten years' imprisonment in the State prison.
            Killing of Jose Vaca. - In an affray at the village of Concord on May 2, 1869, a California Indian named Jose Vaca was killed by another called Fernando Feliz. The deceased had been well known in the vicinity for a long time as a drunken, brawling, besotted fellow, the other being also well known as a quiet, inoffensive person, past the meridian of life, and afflicted from early age with an infirmity that made him a cripple. It appears that the deceased, who had been drinking to inebriation, approached the hut of Feliz with a bottle and wanted him to drink, an invitation he declined, saying that "much whiskey is no good," but told the other he would make a fire and give him something to eat. While making the fire Jose seized hold of him, saying , "Now, I've got you where I want you, and mean to kill you," thereupon striking him a blow with the bottle and breaking it. Fernando, struggling to defend himself , Jose meanwhile slashing and punching his face with the fragments of the bottle, still held in his hand by the neck. In the scuffle that ensued, they got outside of the shanty, where Fernando found an opportunity to seize a large knife with which he gave his antagonist two or three lunges, one of which, as was found on the postmortem examination, passed entirely through the heart, severed the fourth rib, and killed him instantly. A judgment of justifiable homicide was returned.
             Killing of George Minchell. - George Minchell, who, with his family, had been living in Ygnacio Valley, about two miles from Pacheco, and farming on the lands of Charles S. Lohse, was shot at his own door on the morning of September 8, 1870, by a man named William Donovan, who had been in his employ and claimed an unpaid balance of wages, while, it is asserted on the other hand, that he had been overpaid eight dollars. It is said that Donovan visited the house of the deceased on the previous evening, demanding payment of the claimed dues in abusive and threatening language. Minchell directed him to leave the house and followed him out. A moment afterward the discharge of a pistol was heard, and Minchell re-entered the door, saying to his wife, "Mary, I am shot." "You are going to die, George, are you?" "Yes, Mary," and he immediately dropped dead upon the floor. Donovan was arrested, and when the sheriff approached him with the mannacles, he exclaimed, fully realizing his situation, "Oh, God, this is what drink has brought me!" He was duly tried and convicted, and on December 8th, sentenced to be hanged on February 3, 1871. Judgment was stayed, however, and on April 15th Donovan was granted a new trial on the ground that a continuance asked for the defendant on the former trial was improperly denied. The continuance was demanded for the procuring of witnesses to prove that the prisoner had been an inmate of an insane asylum, and it was denied on the admission of the prosecution that the fact alleged would be proved by the required witnesses if they were present. The Supreme Court decided that this admission was not sufficient , and that the defendant was entitled to an opportunity of proving the fact. The case was moved to the San Francisco courts, and on December 12, 1871, Donovan was again convicted of murder in  the first degree. Afterward, in February, 1872, a motion for a new trial was sent on appeal to the Supreme Court, which issued a writ to stay execution  of sentence until the "pending motion is heard and decided," and on June 27th directed that an order be entered affirming the judgment of the court below, and directing the lower court to fix a day to carry the sentence into execution. He was again sentenced to be hanged on December 13th. In the meantime a petition to pardon the murderer had been sent to the governor, who declined to interfere, but ultimately execution was stayed by Governor Booth, who was moved thereto by an immense petition for a commutation of sentence.
             Killing of Herman Heyder. From November 18 to 25, 1870, the Fifteenth District Court was occupied with the trial of Mathew Caspar, indicted for the murder of Herman Heyder, by poison, put into the food served to him by the accused, when the deceased was a visitor at his house some ten or twelve miles southeast of Antioch. The general fact and features of the case may be briefly summarized as follows: On the 6th or 7th of September, 1870, Heyder and Caspar were brought into Antioch, at one o'clock in the morning, Heyder lying in the bottom of the wagon and Caspar sitting upon the seat beside the driver. Both were represented to Doctor Howard to be suffering from the effects of strychnine taken with the food they had eaten for supper at the house of Caspar some five or six hours before. Heyder died soon after reaching Antioch. Caspar recovered, and, from the medical testimony and other facts subsequently developed or considered, it appeared doubtful if he had exhibited any symptoms of having been poisoned at all. A jury was summoned to make investigations in the case. After a patient, thorough, and protracted investigation Caspar was held on their finding to answer before the grand jury on a charge of poisoning Heyder. The finding of this jury, and, presumably, of the grand jury, was based wholly upon strong circumstantial evidence of the guilt of the accused. It was, in the first place, almost inconceivable that so atrocious and diabolical a crime could have been committed without some motive of envy or cupidity; but the most diligent inquiry failed to develop a fact or suggestion which warranted suspicion that anyone had been prompted by such motives to enter Caspar's house in his absence and mingle strychnine with the various condiments and articles of food which would be eaten by him on his return, for the purpose of killing him. Large quantities of strychnine were found in the sugar-bowl, in the pepper-box, in the salt upon the table, in the syrup, in the butter, in the batter-pan, and in the flap-jacks, eaten at least by Heyder for supper - for he was unquestionably poisoned, exhibited all the most painful symptoms, and died within a few hours after the fatal meal. Strychnine was found in his stomach, on chemical analysis of the contents, and in the undigested portions of the cakes he had eaten. The question then arose with the jury of the inquest, Had Caspar any motive which would possibly have prompted him to such an attempt to destroy the life of his visitor and guest? It was shown that Caspar and Heyder had been acquainted for some time; had worked together in herding sheep; that Heyder had money, and that Caspar had been trying for some time to borrow several hundred dollars from him. His statements in relation to the preparation of the supper when Heyder came with him to the house, after having been with him when he had been working during the afternoon, and many other circumstances developed in the investigation, produced a conviction of Caspar's guilt in the minds of the jury of inquest; and the testimony before the grand jury doubtless produced such conviction there as to warrant his indictment for the murder. With the strong circumstantial evidence of guilt which had warranted the findings of the two juries, the prosecution at the trial brought in the testimony of the two prisoners confined in the jail, to prove an admission to them in prison on the part of Caspar that he did the poisoning. This was the only testimony of persons unaccused of crime would have had, though these prisoners had no apparent motive for testifying falsely against the life of another. It is therefore not surprising that, under their solemn responsibilities, with no alternative but condemnation to death or acquittal, the jury should have failed to find a verdict according with the general conviction of the prisoner's guilt.
             Killing of James Fergusson. - A stranger named James Fergusson, on his way from Gilroy, where he been employed in the redwoods, to his home at Windsor, Sonoma County, arrived at Martinez too late to cross the ferry on the evening of June 4, 1871, and met a violent death between midnight and Monday morning, under circumstances of a peculiarly painful nature. The deceased was accompanied by his three sons, aged respectively eighteen, thirteen, and ten years, and being obliged to remain over night at Martinez put up their horses in the stable of the Alhambra Hotel, where he and the two younger lads at a later hour made camp beds, the eldest boy at a still later hour going to his bed in their wagon, which stood in the stable yard. During the evening Fergusson had been drinking pretty freely, and obtained from George Gordon Moor, Sr., the sum of $175, which deceased had given him to take charge of. This money was not found on his body. At about eight o'clock P. M. he went to the saloon of Francisco Saurez and there remained until one o'clock on Monday morning leaving at the same time as did Alexander  Naghel, William Higgins, and K. W. Taylor. The first of these, whose testimony is the most important relative to material facts, stated at the inquest that while there, Taylor playing on a guitar and Suarez on an accordion, deceased jumped up and began talking about soldiering, saying that he had command of fifteen hundred men. Not much attention was paid to what he said, and after a little they all drank together. The deceased then began showing the sword and fist exercises with his cane and fists, most of them joining in the play. Deceased then asked Taylor to take the stick (for attack) and he would defend himself with his fists. After one or two passes Fergusson said to Taylor, "I could have hit you, so and so." Taylor replied, "I could have knocked the knuckles off of you," etc. After a general "skylarking," Taylor handed the stick back to deceased, who, in flourishing it, dropped it on the floor, then giving it a kick that sent it over the screen. Saurez picked the stick up and told the deceased he would keep it until he went away. After this Taylor and Saurez played the guitar and accordion, and deceased wanted them to play "Dixie." They complied, playing and singing, Fergusson joining in the chorus. Negro and Irish songs were then sung. Then Higgins asked for a Union song. The deceased said, "Anyone that will sing a Union song is a d--------d son of a ------------." No reply was made to this remark by anyone. Taylor sang one or two more songs, and afterward a Union patriotic song. After more singing, Saurez said, "Let's all go to bed." Taylor said, Let's all take a drink." All drank except the deceased, who got up and said he "had a boy twelve years old in his wagon over there, and that he had made that boy fetch his man." Taylor said there was no use talking about that now; the war was over. Deceased then began talking about one Southerner being equal to five Yankees. Taylor and Saurez were at this time looking over the accounts of the latter, and while thus employed, and while the deceased was bragging about being able to whip five Yankees, Higgins, who was sitting on the billiard-table, came forward and proposed that all should go home. Taylor said, "We will all go home if Saurez will treat. "Saurez treated, and all drank, including deceased. Taylor, Higgins, and Naghel then went out of the saloon and started toward the bridge. The deceased started at the same time, but turned back to enter the saloon, when Saurez ejected him, telling him to go home and go to bed, as he wanted to shut up. Naghel further stated that he left Taylor in order to go down the street; that the deceased walked up against Taylor, who then turned aside and tried to avoid him. Naghel then walked back to where they were. Deceased again walked up against Taylor, who said, "Go away from me. I don't know who you are, and don't want you to follow me. Go about your business." At this Taylor gave him a shove and he fell backward. After he got up Naghel told him he had better go away, but he would not, and persistently thrust his society upon them. Naghel then asked him where his wagon was. He pointed to where it stood, and he was told to go to it. He started in that direction, Taylor, Higgins, and Naghel walking after him toward the residence of the first named, deceased walking on the sidewalk and they in the middle of the street. When deceased reached Wittenmyer's corner he halted and turned back, still walking on the sidewalk, and went around the corner towards Sturges' Hotel. The three then remained talking for a short time in the middle of the street and opposite the thoroughfare leading to Brent's warehouse. While standing there, Fergusson came back from the direction of the Alhambra Hotel, and approached in the middle of the street to within about fifteen steps, when he dropped on one knee, with a gun pointed in the direction in which they stood. Naghel remarked to his companions, "He has a gun; look out!" They all there-upon concealed themselves in separate places of safety, and the deceased got up to follow. Naghel ran again in the direction of Brent's warehouse, but did not notice where the other two went. He saw, however, deceased drop on one knee as before and saw the flash of a gun. A few seconds later he heard Taylor call for Brown. Naghel then went back to Brown's porch. He (Sheriff Warren Brown) brought out a carbine and gave it to Taylor, cautioning him to be "very careful, for it would go off easy," and, "not to shoot if he could help it" or words to that effect. In the meantime Naghel was dispatched for Gift, to arrest the man. Taylor then took up his position by the railing near the end of the bridge. He now saw deceased approaching, holding his gun as if ready to fire, and searching about him for someone. Seeing Higgins, he pointed the weapon toward him. At this moment Taylor stepped to the end of the bridge and ordered him to hold up his gun. He immediately wheeled around and pointed it at Taylor, when he (Taylor) fired and killed him. Taylor then handed himself over to the sheriff, who had now come up. The jury found a verdict that deceased was killed by K. W. Taylor, the shot being in self-defense.
             Killing of Silverio Monjas. - Of this affair the Contra Costa Gazette of July 8, 1871, has the following: "During the past week the people of the central portion of the county have been intensely excited by occurrences growing out of the disputed ownership and possession of a certain portion of the Moraga grant, about which there has been much litigation and contention for several years. The land in question is claimed on one side by Isaac Yoakum and on the other by members of the Moraga family. Some two months or more ago the sheriff, by writ of the District Court, was directed to put Yoakum in possession of the lands, then occupied by a portion of the Moraga family, but he had, as is claimed, no authority in executing the writ to remove and dispossess such of the Moraga children as were not named in the instrument, and he refused to do so, Yoakum, or his agent, as is said, refusing at the time to accept possession unless all the Moragas and their personal effects were removed. Yoakum subsequently, however, went into occupancy of the portion of the premises to which the writ entitled him, and the Moragas remained in possession, as the sheriff had left them, of a portion of the land claimed by Yoakum, and to which, as we understand, he would have been entitled under the judgment of the court but for an error of ommission in the complaint in action, upon which the judgment was rendered in his favor. From this situation of affairs, both parties claiming and believing they had legal and equitable rights which they were justified in asserting and defending, much heat and bitterness has arisen, and several serious collisions have occurred to the imminent peril of life on both sides. Some time early in May several rifle-shots were fired at one of the Moragas, and the horse he was riding was killed by a man in the employ of Yoakum named William Steele, who was at that time, together with one of the Yoakum boys, under one-thousand-dollar bonds to answer before the grand jury of the county. Since that time the temper of the hostile parties has not improved, and threatening demonstrations and preparations have been made on both sides, with no very serious results, however, until last Sunday (July 1st), when Silverio Monjas, one of the Moraga party, was shot by William Steele, as he affirms, in self-defense. On the previous day there had been a collision between the parties and a good deal of shooting. In the melee one of the Moraga girls was struck with a gun and severely hurt by Yoakum, and the horse he was riding was fatally shot. Reports of these occurrences spread rapidly about the county, and created a degree of excitement and manifestations of indignation seldom produced in our usually quiet and moderate community; and the excitement and indignation reached a higher pitch on Saturday, after the shooting of Monjas, threatening to culminate in a vengeful outbreak against the Yoakum party. In the heat of the excitement many intemperate and improper charges and threats were made, which a cooler judgment and fuller knowledge of facts would not justify. Sheriff brown was on the ground shortly after the shooting of Monjas on Saturday, and, on the information of Yoakum, found and arrested Steele. Yoakum voluntarily offered to surrender himself to the sheriff for examination before any competent magistrate upon any charge that might be preferred against him, and accompanied the sheriff to Walnut Creek, where, on finding Justice Yoakum here declined to accompany the officer further, though he offered to give his word or bond for appearance whenever and for whatever purpose required. As the sheriff had no warrant or authority whatever for detaining him, he was allowed to go; and the sheriff has been highly censured therefor, but, so far as we can see, without the slightest reason."
             Monjas, who was shot by Steele, died about three o'clock on Saturday morning, and a jury of inquest, summoned and sworn on Sunday by Justice Allen, continued their inquiries until Monday evening, when the inquest was adjourned to ten o'clock Saturday morning at Walnut Creek. Steele was brought before Justice Ashbrook for examination on Thursday; the people in the conduct of the case were represented by District Attorney Mills, and the defendant by Judge Blake, of Oakland. The examination was concluded on Friday afternoon, and Steele was held to answer for murder without admission to bail. The jury of inquest found Isaac Slocum to be accessory to the killing of said Silverio Monjas. He was brought before Justice Ashbrook, of Pacheco, on July 10th, to answer to the charge of assault with a deadly weapon, with intent to commit bodily injury upon the person of Gunecinda Moraga, in Moraga Valley, on June 30, 1871. On motion of Judge Warmcastle, acting for  District Attorney Mills, the charge was modified to one of assault and battery. The defendant, contrary to the expense desire of the court, and the prosecution, objected to trial of the charge by jury, and in deference to his objection the case was tried without a jury. The trial occupied the greater part of the 10th and 11th of July. The defendant conducted the case in his own behalf, assisted by a young lady, his daughter, who wrote out the testimony as given in by the witnesses. The evidence produced clearly sustained the charge, and established that the defendant had proved an aggravated assault upon the Moraga girl, striking her twice with his gun and inflicting severe hurts upon her person, while, at the request of his herder, she and her sister were assisting him to drive the defendant's sheep away from the inclosure held by the Moraga family. Yoakum was found guilty and fined five hundred dollars, but gave notice of appeal. On the charge of being accessory with William Steele in the killing of Silverio Monjas, Isaac Yoakum was brought before Justice Wood, of Danville, on July 24th, examination being continued till the 27th, and at its conclusion he was held upon bail of three thousand dollars to answer to the charge.
            The case of George Steele was tried in Alameda County, before the Third District Court, whose tern commenced February 19, 1872. The case was transferred for trial on the motion and affidavits of the prisoner's counsel to the effect that existing prejudice would prevent an impartial trial in Contra Costa County. The case was set for March 4, 1872, and on that date he was acquitted. He was then held on the charge of an assault to murder, with bail bonds fixed at two thousand dollars.
            Killing of Patrick Sullivan. - On the afternoon of October 28, 1871, Justice Ashbrook, of Pacheco, was notified of the death of Patrick Sullivan at the residence of James Sullivan, his brother, near Bay Point, from a gun discharged at his head by Mrs. Catherine Sullivan, the wife of James. Of the untoward affair we find from the testimony adduced that James Sullivan was absent from home for several days, and had returned only on the 24th of October, but heard nothing from his wife that anything unpleasant had transpired, but observed that she did not speak to his brother, nor he to her, and on the 27th his brother told him that he must look out for another man, as he was going to leave. On the day of the killing they had been sowing wheat in the forenoon and all were at the dinner-table as usual, but his wife did not eat, a circumstance that Sullivan attributed to her being unwell. After eating he (the husband) moved back his chair and was reading a newspaper, when he was startled by the discharge of a gun in the room, and, on looking up, saw Mrs. Sullivan standing in the pantry door with a gun, and saw his brother fall forward on the table. Shocked and alarmed, he sprang up and rushed out of the door, his wife following with the gun in her hands, and the children clinging to her skirts. In his excitement and agony of mind, he exclaimed, "My God, what have you done? Was it an accident?" To which his wife replied: "No; I shot him. He deserved it. He was a villain. He attempted a vile outrage on me!" She then told him that the deceased, on the night of the 23rd had forced open the window, entered her bedroom, and attempted to outrage her, but she fought him off, and on her declaring that she would take the children and go to Cunningham's (one of the neighbors) for protection, he threatened if she did so, or if she reported a word of the matter to her husband, he would kill her. On the following morning, after she had passed a sleepless night, while she was preparing kindling wood to light a fire, he came in, threw his arms around her and attempted to force her into his room, but she fought him off with the butcher knife she was using to split the kindling, and her little boy, who had been awakened by the noise, coming into the kitchen, he retired; but during the morning, and before the return of her husband, the deceased found an opportunity to renew his threat to kill her if she reported a word of what had occurred. All the testimony and collateral circumstances seemed to sustain Mrs. Sullivan's statement of the matter to her husband, and the statement she made upon the inquest and the examination is the same. She was apprehended and held on five thousand dollars bail to answer to the charge before the grand jury. Mrs. Sullivan was duly arraigned and the case set for November 24, 1871, when she was properly acquitted.
             Killing of Peter Peters. On March 14, 1872, a Welshman named Peter Peters was shot and mortally wounded by a fellow-countryman named Jacob Heycock. From the testimony given before the coroner's jury, it appears that Heycock was aroused from his sleep on Thursday morning between the hours of four and five o'clock by a great noise in the room adjoining his bedroom. He got up, went into the next room, taking with him a loaded double-barreled shot-gun. It was quite dark there, but he thought he noticed somebody going upstairs. He called out to him to stop, but receiving no answer he fired. The deceased fell down to the bottom of the stairs. Heycock approached him, found him to be Peter Peters, a very particular friend of his. It also appeared from the testimony that William Rees, a person living with Heycock, was about lighting a fire in the kitchen when the deceased approached the window from the outside, broke a pane of glass, raised the window and came in. Rees did not know who the person was, his light having gone out, and was frightened so that he ran upstairs, causing thereby a great noise, which woke everybody in the house. The jury of inquest returned a verdict of justifiable homicide.
             In regard to the principal of this affair, the following "strange story" appeared above the signature "W" in the Alameda Advocate of May 11, 1972, : "In 1837, on the 26th of November, the cosmopolitan community of Crumlin, a small village in Monmouthshire, in the western part of England, were aroused and somewhat bewildered by the commission of a foul crime, the perpetrators of which did not only escape, but so skillfully covered their tracks that discovery seemed impossible. A recent disclosure made under very similar circumstances, as will be seen from this brief narrative, has brought to life this once-thought impenetrable mystery. The circumstances may not be unfamiliar to many of the old residents of Monmouthshire. The victim was a young man by the name of Mason, who was found dead on the old Crumlin bridge with his body mangled in a fearful manner. A few weeks after this foul crime had been committed, three men disappeared from the village very mysteriously to parts unknown. There has been strong suspicion that these were the guilty parties. One of the three was named Peter Peters, better known in this country as 'Welsh Pete.' For fifteen years he had been rambling through the different mining districts of California; the last few years he has been laboring in the Mount Diablo coal mines. His voyage through life had been anything but pleasant. Given very much to dissipation, under the effects of which he was laboring on the morning of the 12th of February last, when he, at about five o'clock leaped from his bed, imagining that he was surrounded by a host of enemies with various kinds of weapons in their hands, with the intention of taking his life. He ran into an adjoining house for protection, and jumped through the window of a back kitchen, Heycock, the proprietor, heard the noise and went to the kitchen door with his gun in his hand, and, as he says, called three times. Hearing no reply, he discharged the contents of his gun into Welsh Pete's body, when he fell to the floor. In a few moments he seemed quite conscious, and Heycock promptly dispatched a messenger for medical assistance, acknowledging that he had made a mistake. The utmost attention was paid to the wounded man, yet he gradually became more feeble; but his strength and voice were spared to make a clear confession of being accessory to the murder of Mason on the old Crumlin bridge thirty-five years before. At ten o'clock the same day his symptoms became worse and in a few moments after he breathed his last."
            Murder of Valentine Eischler. - On November 16, 1972, one valentine Eischler, a German, was killed on Marsh Creek, about eight miles southeast of Antioch, near what is called the "Chamisal." He was living with his wife upon a small farm, and had in his employ one Marshal Martin. During the stay of Martin, Mrs. Eischler formed a determination to get rid of her husband, and several plans were formed by her and Martin for carrying into effect her deadly purpose. In pursuance of the plan, Martin went to Antioch one day and purchased a quantity of arsenic, and when he came home she mixed some of it with stewed pumpkin and put it on the table for supper. But it so happened that Eischler did not partake of any of it. The next morning it was thrown down the privy vault. A few days after she repeated the dish, but Martin claimed that he persuaded her to throw it away. She then wanted Martin to tell Eischler that there were some pigs for sale at Point of Timber, and to go along with him in the wagon, get him to drinking, and then buy a bottle of whiskey and put arsenic into it. Martin went along with Eischler, but for some reason the plan did not succeed. Another plan was then formed by which Martin was to knock Eischler off the wagon on the way home from Antioch and run the wagon over his head. A neighbor riding home with them prevented this plan. Then she suggested that Martin should shoot him. Martin had a revolver which he had purchased from a man who got it in Vallejo, and it would be necessary to go there to get cartridges to fit it. She gave him the money to go there, and he got the cartridges and returned. The day upon which the murder was committed, Eischler went to Antioch for a load of flour; Martin accompanied him, according to instructions. Before starting Mrs. Eischler placed an old blanket in the wagon so that Martin, after killing Eischler, could wrap the body in it, and when he returned she would go with him to an old well near by, throw the body down the well, pour coal oil upon it and burn it up. Martin's heart failed him, and he did not shoot Eischler. When they returned she was very angry with Martin for not carrying out her plan, and told him that he did not love her, or he would do as she wished him to. After unloading the flour and putting the horses in the stable (it being about 4 p.m.), as Martin testified, he went about doing the chores, and Eischler commenced making a doubletree. He had a piece of coupling, an axe, saw, hatchet, and jack-knife, and was using the wagon-tongue as a workbench. Martin says that while he was watering a cow, which had to be led to water by a rope, Mrs. Eischler came out and commenced talking to her husband. They had some very high words. He heard Eischler say to his wife, "Woman, take your clothes and go back to the w-------- house where you came from." Then Mrs. Eischler stepped back and, picking up the axe, said, "I'll give you w-------- house," and struck her husband on the back of the head, knocking him over the wagon-tongue so that his body doubled over it; then she straddled the tongue and struck him two more blows on the front part of the head. Then she called Martin to come and help drag the body into the stable. After placing it in the stable Martin went to saddle his horse for the purpose of going to the Good Templar's lodge at Eden Plains schoolhouse, about two miles away. While fixing his horse, he said that she went into the stable and struck the victim two more blows with the axe, and that when she came out said that she had found him sitting up, but that she had fixed him now. When Martin returned from the lodge she told him to go and arouse the neighbors and tell them that Eischler was dead in the stable, and that the horses had kicked him to death. He obeyed her instructions. When the neighbors came some of them suspected that he had been murdered. The next day, when they went to examine the body, they found a great many horehound burrs on the woolen shirt of the deceased, and by this means they found where the body had been dragged to the stable. Afterward they noticed the flies gathering upon Martin's shoes and pants, and this fact, together with the burrs upon the woolen shirt, led them to make search for the place where the murder had been committed. During this search Martin was very active in leading them off in different directions, but finally they came to the wagon and examined the sandy soil around it. They soon found a damp place, and putting some of the sand in a basin of water it exhibited a bloody color, and a greasy scum arose to the surface. Martin and the woman were then arrested and taken to Antioch, where they both made confession, each charging the other, however, with having directly done the murder. Martin's testimony under cross-examination on the trial substantially agreed with this summary of the facts of the case. Martin was duly executed January 23, 1874, having previously made a full confession of his share in the dreadful crime. On the scaffold he said, "Gentlemen, I am here on this platform to die an innocent man. That woman deserves ten times as much to die." It is not meet that we should here note the details of his execution; these will remain in the minds of many of our readers. The wife of the victim of the barbarous drama has been ever since an inmate of the lunatic asylum at Stockton.
            

Transcribed by Sally Kaleta

 

(continued on next page)

 

Back to Contra Costa County Histories Index Page