Table of Contents

THE SANCHEZ FILE, Chapter Seven

The Squatters

In asking for the sale of cattle, Head cited the problem with squatters. Because of the immense size of the Sanchez ranchos it was impossible for the vaqueros to stop the squatters from killing the cattle. In the early days the owner of a rancho did not mind if a hungry traveler killed a steer for his dinner without paying for it. The traveler was only required to leave the hide where the owner could find it. The hide was valuable, the meat was not. As the demand for meat increased this practice ended.

American squatters had no hesitancy of moving on to land owned by others,
building a cabin, damming up the streams, and stealing the owner's cattle. From the profit of their illegal activities they hired lawyers to challenge the owner of the Mexican land grant before the U.S. Land Commissioners, established by Congress to decide ownership of the Mexican land grants.

The squatters knew that if they held on to the land for fourteen months, they had a good chance of claiming ownership to at least a part of it. The Preemption Act of 1841 allowed settlers to buy 160 acres of public land at the bargain price of $1.25 an acre.

Mexican land grants that were rejected became public land. To secure title a squatter had to build a cabin and work the fields for the fourteen months.
For the Mexican owner, the process of getting a patent to his land took years. Even those who won their cases had to sell land to pay their expensive American attorneys.

Because the three Sanchez land grants were in probate and the original claimant was dead, squatters felt they had a better chance of keeping what they had appropriated.

The Blacksmith, William Clark

June 27, 1953

The inventory that Head filed a month earlier showing the estate was worth over $300 thousand bothered Henry Sanford. Head's bond was still only $100 thousand. If Head continued to dismember the estate through property sales and absconded with the funds the family could collect only $100 thousand; assuming Head's bondsmen were solvent, which Sanford doubted. Furthermore, Head had never accounted for the money in his hands and Judge Merritt didn't seem in any hurry to order one.

Sanford saw his wife's estate and that of her children slipping away.
He filed a petition on June 27, 1853 asking that Head's bond be increased to the revised value of the estate. He stated that Head's present bond of $100 thousand was insufficient to preserve the estate from waste, mismanagement and destruction. Merritt ordered Head to increase his bond to $300 thousand. It would be one of the few times he ever ruled in favor of the estate, but Merritt couldn't ignore the law.

It was a small victory but Sanford knew he would have to come up with solid
evidence of fraud against the estate . Two months later he thought he had found it. He asked that Head be summoned to a hearing on charges of fraud. Merritt granted it.

At the hearing on July 2, 1853 attorneys for the estate presented evidence against William Clark, a friend of Roach and an ex-member of the New York Volunteers.

Clark had submitted a claim to Head for $3,300 for work as the blacksmith on the rancho for three years. Sanford did not believe any man would have gone that long without getting paid and decided the claim should be investigated.
He knew the blacksmith had once worked for John Gilroy on his rancho and
Sanford went to him for information on Clark's background. Gilroy gave Sanford a deposition to present to the probate court.

Gilroy's Deposition

In 1845 or 46, William Clark was working with me on my ranch in the blacksmith shop on an equal share basis. He had been at work about 18 months when Jose Maria Sanchez came to the shop and induced Clark to leave the shop and go to his rancho and live with him. Sanchez said he would do better by him than he was doing with me.

Clark went to live with Sanchez and remained with him for about a year and a half and then went away and remained gone about a year and returned to Sanchez. Then about a year ago he left again and was gone about three or four months and returned a second time and remained with Sanchez until Sanchez died.

During the last absence Sanchez came to my farm to look for him and said that Clark was indebted to him for $3000. When Clark returned he acknowledged that he was in debt to Sanchez and that he would go to Sanchez and work the debt out, for Sanchez had always been a kind, good man to him and treated him more like a father than otherwise.

  signed: John Gilroy

Clark's frequent absence from the Sanchez rancho was the result of
his drinking. Sanford wondered how Clark could have a claim against
the estate for $3,300, when Clark had acknowledged to Gilroy he owed
the estate money. Sanford asked Clark to meet him at the office of
James McMahon, the 30 year old justice of the peace at San Juan.
McMahon later testified what happened that day in August of 1853:

McMahon’s Testimony

Clark and Sanford came into my office. It was obvious that Clark had been drinking as the effects had not yet worn off.*  He admitted to us that his $3300 claim was false and that he knew it was wrong. He had only done it at the instigation of others.
Sanford told Clark he would have to sign an affidavit before me admitting the claim was false.

Clark said, "they will shoot me if I do."

Sanford and Clark then went into another room, leaving me alone. After awhile the two men came back and Sanford told me to administer the oath to Clark, that he was ready to sign the affidavit that his claim was false.

Clark said he needed a drink, but Sanford told him he had to keep sober until he made the affidavit. After the document had been signed Sanford gave Clark some money to pay his passage on the stage and Sanford left with the signed affidavit.

                      James McMahon,
                      Justice of the Peace

*Note that McMahon did not use the word "hangover" to describe the effects of Clark's drinking. Hangover was not used until 1894.

The fear Clark had of being shot was real and illustrates the lawlessness that prevailed in California at that time.

Bancroft wrote, "Ancient belligerents, each having sworn to kill his enemy on sight, would stroll about the street with eyes and ears on the alert, with hand on pistol-hilt, and on coming together both would draw and fire as rapidly as possible, neither of them speaking a word."

Clark’s Fears

After Clark sobered up he felt terrible, not so much from the drinking, but from the realization he had signed his own death warrant by telling Sanford the estate was being defrauded. His life now wasn't worth a cent. Men had been killed for a lot less than he had done. And he had done it to the most powerful figures in Monterey County.

Two weeks went by and nothing happened. Even the silence worried Clark. Finally he heard that Sanford had given Judge Merritt the affidavit he had signed and that Merritt had issued an order to Head not to pay the claim. Clark realized he had to do something in a hurry. He came up with an idea. It was risky, but he could think of nothing else. He would make up a story that Merritt and Head might believe. Both men knew he did stupid things when he was drunk. Clark went to the judge and gave him this version of the meeting with Sanford.

Yes, he had signed the affidavit that his claim was false, but Sanford had got him so drunk he did not know what he was signing and was in no condition to know anything.

It was Clark's lucky day and his tale was believed by Judge Merritt, who said he would reinstate Clark's claim. A new petition was drawn up for Clark to sign:

The Petition

On or about 18th of August 1853, Henry L. Sanford did by undue and unlawful influence, by threatening and intoxicating him, made him sign an affidavit that deponent had no legal claims against the estate of Jose Maria Sanchez.

On the presentation of that affidavit your honor ordered the administrator, Samuel C. Head, not to pay your petitioner the amount your honor had previously ordered to be paid.

Petitioner did not sign the affidavit of his own free will, and if he did, he was in an improper condition to know what he was doing. Petitioner requests court to place his claim once again to the administrator as a lawful claim and to issue an order that may protect him, your petitioner, from the intrigues and fraud
which have been practiced upon him.

                  Signed:  William Clark
                              Petitioner

Sanford, not knowing the claim had been reinstated, went to Head and gave him a copy of the judge's order stopping payment to Clark,  This is what transpired according to testimony given later by one Frances Ripley.

Q. Did you or not hear a conversation between Sanford and Captain Clark in reference to a claim against the estate of Jose Maria Sanchez, and if so state the purpose of that conversation.

A. I was present with Sanford when he notified Captain Head that Clark had made an affidavit that the estate of Jose Maria Sanchez owed him nothing and that Captain Head replied, "Very good, sir. I shall not pay him. You are just in time."

Head was lying. He had already asked Judge Merritt to authorize two payments to Clark totaling $2000.

Even a deposition from a man by the name of Andrew Colthen, who knew Clark, had no effect in the probate court.

Some days after Sanchez died I was with Clark at his blacksmith shop. Clark told me that he did not know what he would do, that he had no means of making a living. I asked him if the estate owed him anything and Clark said no. He was perfectly sober when he said this.

At the hearing Head denied all the charges against him. Judge Merritt ruled in favor of Head and ordered the estate to pay Head's court costs of $233.
Sanford now knew it was impossible for his wife and her children to get any justice in Monterey County.

Head continued as administrator showing no inclination to wind up the affairs of the estate. Reasons were always found to file new motions of one sort or the other. Another thing that helped Head and Roach was that the probate court did not meet for months at a time.

Chapter Eight