The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1893-12-27
His Reply to the Charge of His
Client, Du Bots.
AN OCHRE MINING VENTURE
How Lumberman Cowing Was In
duced to Go Into It-Not Paid
for, to Begin With.

over the charge made against him by T. &.
du Bots to the grie vance committee of the
Bar Association. He promises to reply to
the accusation. and anticipates tina. when
he has told his side of the story. W hich will
not reflect very creditably upon Mr.. du
Bots. there will probably be no need OF any
investigation.
The grievance committee did not meet
yesterday afternoon as expected, the wife
of the chairman, John A. Wright, being
very sick and a 14-year-old daughter of
Mr.. Wright having juft died in Baltimore,
where she was attending school. When,
under the circumstances. il will come to-
gether has not yet been decided upon.
AS Mr.. Greedy was six years In the law
office of Gordon. Young & MeAllister. be-
ing their chief clerk, he naturally went
yesterday and had talk with L. b.
oung, who Is also member of the COM
mlttee. From the way the interview re-
suited Mr. Greedy inferred that the grew
ance committee would hardly consider Du
Bois' charge worthy its consideration.
The article in the Sunday CALL was
fair so far as it went" said Mr.. Greedy to
reporter. "but such stories are hard upon
young lawyer who is struggling along,
ana l think / ought to. have an oppor-
tunity 10 explain. See here" and he
pulled cut his books of records and costs
accounts, opened it and pointed to the
record OF attachment proceedings in the
case Of Archie Owens VS.. E II. Cowing,
under date of December q, 1892. The
title of the case needed an explanation,
which Mr.. Greedy ave. The record
showed that attachments had been issued
simultaneously against Mr.. CowiDg as
follows:
On 975 shares of stock in the Poso Creek
Lumber Company. held in Mr.. Cowing's
name; on an account OF $4,000 supposed to
have been advanced by Mr.. COwiDg to W.
j. Peal, president of the lumber concern,
for stock; on an account OF $1,000 owed
TO Cowing by n. c. Carnall: and on 30
tons of ochre in the Arizona warehouse.
Now" said Mr.. Greedy, 'Mr. du Bots
says he engaged me in February, whereas
the proceedings were taken year ago last
Decem Der, and he also complains that he
paid me S15 for costs. bat did not get any,
thing bu: doubtful satisfaction. Here Is
record OF costs which / advanced" and |
be pointed to the page opposite.
The list OF costs showed: Clerks fees, |
81 so, affidavit and bond, 81 so; four writs |
of attachment, si2; service of summons.
81 80; total, SO 80.
You see, Mr.. du Bots did not pay me
enough and he still owes me for the |
balance.
"He charges me also that 1 did not at
tach Cowing's homestead In Alameda.
which man did not possess. The home
stead was heavily incum bered. and was a
trust company affair. the contract with the
company not having been fulfilled.
And about the three notes. amounting
to $780, which he says l represented were
to be Endorsed but were notiDdorsed. Here
is a statement over the signature of Mr..
Cowing, made when Du Bots executed
bill OF sale 10 Cowing according TO an
agreement entered into last January-on
January 10. to be exact"
The document bore the date of Feb
ruary IL. and has the name of II. A. Zahn
attached to it as witness. 1t read:
The understanding regarding the settlement
OF the Archie Owens case was made In my
presence. and was as follows, viz: Du Bois
was TO accept $500 In gold coin and three
notes Of mine, uDindorsed, in full settlement OF
his claim. the notes 10 be secured by mortgage,
E. I'll. CowING.
A receipt in du Bois' handwriting was
then produced.
''Mr. du Bots says l charged him s120
attorneys fees" remarked Mr.. Greedy.
This is his receipt given to me on that
cording TO 1t l only got $40 90" Following
was the receipt:
Received from James II. Greedy four hundred
and fifty and 50-l00 dollars in re CowIng.
ARCHIE OWENS,
L Si Il. ~. ID
The title of the case. "Archie Owens VS..
E. II. Cowing." was explained by Mr..
Greedy in the fol owing history of Mr.. du
Bots Ochre miEe venture:
The 'Masnesite Ochre Com pany,' of
which Mr.. du Bois claims to be president,
really never came into existence. Du Bots
purchased from man whose name. |
think, was Davis, leasehold for only $500
in an ochre mine at Valley Springs, on the
property OF Mrs. E. Z. Late. / was told
by Du Bots himself that he never paid for
ii. Well, he started in TO operate the
mine, put up an ochre mill on Gold street,
and failed.
when he failed he owed Mr. Butcher
of the Phoenix White Lead and Color
Works $500 for rent, and his workmen
$500 or $500, and he also owed a lot of ma
terial men. There was a whole stack of
attachments and liens against him and he
mad 10 leave the business.
''ln September, 1892, Dubois induced by
plausible representations Mr.. Cowing To
purchase half interest In the lease hold
Tor $1,000. he told CowiDg there was a lot
Of money In the mine. Cowing put S1121
in cash into it and gave a contract for
$3.50 COwing afterward became dissat-
ished and refused to pay any more money,
telling Du Bots to take back bis mine.
Last December Du Bots came to me
ana employed me 10 sue Cowing for the
$3.50. He brought the suit in the name of
Archie owens, c0mrade, TO whom he as
signed bis interest for the purpose OF ward
ing off his creditors. assHsx
''Du Bots was being forced on all sidrs.
The man from whom he purchased the
mine was pushing Du Bots for his money.
and on January of this year the Vulcan
lied Fiber Company sued Du Bots for
S479 for goods sold to him. With these
matters hanging over him Du Bots insist
ed upon settlement of some kind with
Cowing. What that settlement was you
have already seen from Cowing's state
ment.
Before Cowing's first note"-which
was for three months-"became due Cow
ing began an action in the Superior Court
herein Judge CARRIERS department
through NaDhthaly. Freidenrich and Ack-
erman, against Du Bots to declare the
notes void of obligation ON the ground
that Du Bots had imposed on him and to
recover the money he had already paid to
Dn Bots. This action Is still pending.
Now, there Is one question would like
to ask. Ii Du Bots was not satisfied last
January with the settlement agreed to
between him and Cowing, why did he
give TO Cowing the bill of sale for
the half interest in the mine and accent
the $500 and the three notes? He had