The San Francisco call., 1895-10-13
END Of THE FAMOUS SCHULZ Tz-McLEAN SUIT


the time he was a partner of Warren Olney
and James K. Byrne. under the firm name
of Robinson, Olney & Byrne.
Schultz & Won Bargen did not want
the boundary line erased on the map of
the Carissa Plains, so they hired Robinson,
Olney & Byrne to fight the claim of James
B. Haggin. But the claim proved valid,
and Schultz & Won Bargen stood in a
fair way not only of losing their land, but
of Losing it to the very man against whom
they had action for damages-or thought
they had, because those sheep wandered
into wrong pastures.
1t was better, to part with their land to
q stranger and thus retain their rights for
action against Haggin. They employed
G. P Robinson to find that stranger. and
in order that he might be better prepared
for this task they decided to him the title of
the Carissa acres.
Robinson found the stranger in the per-
son of Grass Valley mining man, George
D. Mclean. At first Mclean objected to
investing in pasture lands. His business
was mining, he had been successful at it
and meant to stick to it. But Robinson
painted these Carissa lands with all the
glow of his splendid Imagination, to the
Grass Valley mining man, and the end OF
it was that Mr.. Mclean paid S26, 900 in
cash for II, 225 acres of land and ten years
litigation that has cost him the price OF
some of the best lawyers in the State.
AT first Mclean was wary of the title,
which was at that time rather a mixed
quantity, and to straighten out this matter
he employed his old friend from Missouri,
Attorney Frank Adams. then an argonaut
of San Luis Obispo.: The title was
Strengthened out, the. money paid to Hag-
gin and the deed passed from Louis Schultz
and George Schultz and Henry Won Bargen
and Cornelius P. Robinson to George D.
Mclean. Then the Grass Valley man
went back to his mines, the sheep to the
greenest hills the brokers to their Com
stock deals, and Mr.. Robinson to his large
visions of future greatness.
But things began to grow bad for the
brokers; in fact, a peck of trouble was soon
to come upon all these beings, except the
sheep. First came the troubles of the
brokers, financial troubles. At the same
time there came along the boom in South
ern California lands. Carissa Plains acres,
as prospective sites for large and flourish
ing metropolitan cities, assumed fabulous
values-on paper-and the now-all- but
wrecked mining brokers began to regret
their haste in parting with their pasture
lands. They coveted those sunny acres
and set about to regain possession of them.
There began to be lot of talk about
trust deeds and one thing and another in
connection with the sale to Mclean.
Schultz & Won Bargen demanded of Mclean
a release of the property, offering, of course,
not only to pay back the 1000 expended
by him, but a handsome bonus as well.
Mclean maintained that he held the lands
in fee simple and that he did not care to
sell and would certainly not be bulldozed
into it-those were his own words at the
time. Schultz & Won Bargen then offered
him $500, 900 to release the deed.
1t is probable that had Mr.. Mclean been
gifted enough to lift the curtain that hid
the Southern California land collapse of
1889 from 1888, he would have pocketed his
indignation and the 100000 together and
let the land go to the brokers.
The land is worth nearly as much now,
bnt some high-priced lawyers have had
fees out of it-notably w. F. Herrin, Judge
Gregg, D. NJ. Delmas, Judge McKinstry.
Colonel Osmond and others-for ten long
years.
Schultz & Won Bargen brought suit to
regain possession of the land, claiming
that Mclean had obtained it by fraud and
held it only in trust. Their complaint
was filed in 1884 at San Luis Obispo. It
was the suit which grew out of this COM
plant that the Supreme Court settled for
ever by its decision concerning techni-
cality filed October 9, 1895.
Judge Waymire's name was signed to
this first complaint, as attorney for Schultz
& Van 3argen. Attorney Van Ness was
behind him all the while, but this did not
appear until the case came to trial.
G. z. Robinson was made co-defendant
with Mclean in this suit and the COM
plant openly charged both these gentle
men with the grossest frauds. 1t was al
legged that Robinson had defrauded one
client-the firm of Schultz & Van Bargen-
in order to enrich the other-George D. Nc
Lean.
The case was tried before jury in San
Luis Obispo. When Attorney Van Ness
then appeared as chief counsel for the
plaintiffs and consequently as the author
of those charges of fraud in the complaint
OAIC1C NCAcI W pun ~
Robinson and Van Ness we're close
friends. Van Ness in fact was under obli-
cations to Robinson, it was said, at the
time At any rate Van Ness kept dark un-
til the very last moment and then there
was an explosion and almost, if not quite,
an alteration when the two lawyers met
| in the streets of San Luis.
The only witness for the plaintiffs was
George Schultz, who swore that before he
transferred the deed to Mclean Robinson
told him that Mclean had delivered to
him (Robinson), and that it was then in
| Robinson's safe, contract in which Nc
Lean agreed TO hold the land only until a
part could be sold for enough to repay his
outlay to Haggin and per cent interest.
OF course, Robinson never bad such an
| agreement from Mclean and the Supreme
Court has decided that Mclean never even
agreed to make one.
But the first jury that tried the case
| gave verdict for the plaintiffs and Judge
D. S. Gregory of San Luis Obispo wrote
his findings to conform with the verdict oi
the jury. In this trial Robinson appeared
as his own attorney and Attorneys Adams,