[SIXTEEN]
Pearl McCallum McManus
at 50 years
They Can't Tear Down the Mountain
Emily and Pearl
1
For six years after May died, Pearl and her mother were indeed alone on the
desert, struggling to exist, refusing to sell the land John Guthrie had
nurtured and protected for his heirs.
They were cash poor and relied on Hamilton Forline to help out with the
taxes. Pearl needed a miracle to survive and take
care of Emily. But Hamilton Forline was
not that miracle. He wasn’t in love with
Pearl and never
had been. Although not a 19th
Century chauvinist, his idea of a woman was that she should at least be
feminine and docile—to a degree. Pearl fit neither
description. Pearl was strong-willed and had become as
harsh as the desert in her affections.
Her desperation to survive with an ailing mother toughened her.
She must get control of the land titles. And if Hamilton
couldn’t take care of his children, she convinced herself she somehow would
find a way to do so, in years to come.
She would build her Palm
Springs holdings into something of worth, and May’s
children would benefit. It would not be
easy, certainly not as her father had envisioned Palm Springs —as an agricultural wonderland. The obstacles seemed insurmountable.
Extract:- Pearl McCallum’s Appeal to the Government for Water Rights
[Note: throughout, Pearl has spelled her family name MacCallum—here corrected. Emphasis in italics is added.]
From the occupancy of The McCallum Ranch by white men and
the development of the water with building of the big ditch by white men to the
year 1904, the water was justly controlled by them, but as the Indians had
lived here in the valley first and although they had little or nothing under
cultivation, the first 30 inches was
always allowed them. Later on, when
they, the Indians had planted from 5 to 18 acres we willingly gave them the first 40 inches.
In 1904 however, through a misunderstanding, the government represented by the attorney for the Indians, Mr. Collier ofRiverside , issued an order
stating that no white man should touch the ditch or use the water under threat
of arrest. This order was the
consequence of a report that a certain white man located on other property in
the village had used some of the first 30 inches for irrigational
purposes. The attorney, Mr. Collier, has
personally told me that the order was related to the first 30 inches only and
should have stood only until the rains came, as he knew that the Indians had no
further right to the water. The order
was, however, very naturally interpreted by all as it read and later when there
were thousands of inches of water running to waste on the desert, besides all
the ditches on the reservation breaking and flooding the streets etc. the
Indians would not allow the water to be touched by the white people.
In 1904 however, through a misunderstanding, the government represented by the attorney for the Indians, Mr. Collier of
Previous to this, and due to the great drought so well
known to Californians that lasted so many years, the ranch had gradually been
dying. Every effort was made to save it,
water being hauled by wagon 3½ miles to the apricot orchard in a vain attempt
to save it.
Judge McCallum and his three sons had died leaving an
invalid widow and a daughter to look after the property. About all they had left – dishonest employees
helped to make the loss greater and at the time I write of when the government
first started to cause trouble about the water, there was left upon the ranch
only the grapes, a few apricots and a half acre of very choice big orange
trees. The income from these trees being
the chief source of income for the widow – between $300. and $400. being
realized the last years of bearing.
In 1904, due to Mr. Collier’s order not to use the water, the Indians would not allow anyone to irrigate the grapes or orange trees, although there were thousands of inches of water running to waste. The trees began to wither and a George Blackburn, passing through the village, noticed the dying trees and offered to take all chance of being arrested and irrigate them at his own risk and expense. This he was not allowed to do but later Mr. Mendon, a tourist stated it was an outrage upon the part of the government to cause Mrs. McCallum to lose the trees with quantities of water running through her own ranch, and that he should irrigate the trees in spite of everyone. He was threatened by the Indians but removed the water gate, hid it, and turned the water into the grove for two days. But the water had come too late and the trees died. Upon my arrival in 1905 I found the leaves yellowed and dry and trunks with bark mostly peeled off.
In 1904, due to Mr. Collier’s order not to use the water, the Indians would not allow anyone to irrigate the grapes or orange trees, although there were thousands of inches of water running to waste. The trees began to wither and a George Blackburn, passing through the village, noticed the dying trees and offered to take all chance of being arrested and irrigate them at his own risk and expense. This he was not allowed to do but later Mr. Mendon, a tourist stated it was an outrage upon the part of the government to cause Mrs. McCallum to lose the trees with quantities of water running through her own ranch, and that he should irrigate the trees in spite of everyone. He was threatened by the Indians but removed the water gate, hid it, and turned the water into the grove for two days. But the water had come too late and the trees died. Upon my arrival in 1905 I found the leaves yellowed and dry and trunks with bark mostly peeled off.
When it is considered that the McCallum Ranch was the first to use this water and had done so
uninterruptedly for nearly twenty years, that the loss of the income from
the oranges entailed such hardship, can it be wondered at if we considered it
unjust of the government that should have protected the invalid widow as well
as the husky Indian?
Upon my return to California
I explained the condition to Mr. Collier, the attorney, who stated that he was
“sorry” such a blunder had been made and the water was again turned on to the
property. But the trees were dead, and
the vineyard too far gone to bear well again for years.
The water was used then until the advent of Miss True – so
unfortunately to the white people, the Indians and the Government. Acting for the Government and far exceeding
her authority, as the officials repeatedly told me, she issued orders through
an ugly minded Indian she had appointed policeman, that no white man should touch
the ditch or take the water under penalty of arrest and probability of forever
losing the use of the water. Indians
patrolled our private properties with pistols and handcuffs, and water when
given to us was 15¢ an hour, besides paying the Indians for keeping the ditch
in good condition. Some 200 inches were
kept running to the reservation while they had less than 20 acres under cultivation,
and this was the largest amount they ever had planted.
In two places the ditch was broken allowing the water to
escape and in one place damage a street, and although the breaks could have
been mended by one-half a day’s work, this was not done; the water running so
for months.
CARELESSNESS CAUSE OF BIG WASH
During the summer of 1901, Sept. 1, a heavy rain storm
visited the desert. This would have
caused no damage under ordinary circumstances, but the gate in the “Intake”
controlling this flow of water into the ditch was gone, thus allowing an
enormous head of water to come down the line of the ditch, tearing out the dam,
sweeping north and east diagonally across the 20 acre apricot field (where the
trees were formerly) then down Park Avenue, then back across the 20 acre field
following the line of the Whitewater Canal, breaking through that and tearing a
great hole; thence Northeast through a five acre field into Park Street again
and out on Main St. A second wash ran
Eastward along the South boundary fence into a 20-acre field, then North and
joining the first wash at the Whitewater
Canal
The gate missing was the cause of the first wash.
Second washout or enlargement
of first
due to deteriorate action of government men.
due to deteriorate action of government men.
The first week in January 1911 the Government sent under
Mr. Oldberg, C.E. and Mrs. Makosky, to boss field work, a gang of men to
construct a new cement pipe and stone ditch to carry Tahquitz water to the
white people and Indians. A sentiment in
the meantime having practically been forced upon the white people whereby the
whites were to retain about one-third of Tahquitz water and the Indians
two-thirds – Permission was very gladly given the Government men to camp upon
The McCallum Ranch. From the first it
was evident that the men in charge were prejudiced against the owners of the
property although they had never met them before; this being shown in many
little ways and a total disregard for the welfare of the property.
They wished water for domestic purposes, also for mixing
the sand and cement. A large head was
allowed to come down from the Canyon and this was deliberately turned
out of the old ditch just south of the Southwest Corner of the ranch where it
became an uncontrolled wild stream that ran through the broken dam through the
entire length of the ranch causing it to be greatly widened in all places,
deepened in some and filled with tons and tons of white sand in others. This water ran directly in front of the
government camp and the men therefore saw from day to day the havoc the water
was creating. Mr. Oldberg was spoken to
regarding the damage and he answered very shortly that any damage done would be
repaired. But it continued; Mr. Makosky
was spoken to. It must be remembered that all that was needed to turn the entire flow
out of the ditch at the Canyon was the gate that had disappeared from the
“Intake” after the government took control.
(It would have taken less than half a day to build and install a new
one) Mr. Makosky answered that he was
“too busy” to attend to the water then; later on he returned and stated that
the water had been turned away. I made
an investigation and found that the water was then running through a second
wash outside the south boundary of the ranch; thence again entering the
property through a ten acre field; then north where it rejoined the original
wash and continued through the ranch as before.
What Mr. Makosky’s idea in this maneuver was I do not know, for the
damage was just as great one way as the other.
This condition had prevailed practically every day for the past three
months. Sunday while dining I found that
water they had deliberately turned loose had swept along the Whitewater Canal
then onto Indian Ave., the only good street running through the village,
washing it out badly and ruining it for driving. All this was absolutely unnecessary, and
could be prevented with a very little work and a few boards with which to make
the gate. I would willingly have done it
myself but the government has assumed absolute control and we have long since
been forbidden to touch the water or ditch under penalty of arrest. This
wash had practically ruined one half of the McCallum Ranch. The white sand deposited can never be carried
away and good soil can never be substituted for what has been carried
away. The value of this property is for
small lots for winter homes for invalid tourists. Twice this winter I could have sold to
parties of wealth and standing – Mr. James Summerton, the famous cartoonist and
Mrs. B. W. MacKenzie of Coronado
Beach
The two washes pass through some thirty acres valued at
$300.00 an acre. The work the Government
has done with the new ditch and pipe has been very good and both my Mother and
myself esteem the men in charge for their proficiency and have done all in our
power to facilitate the work. But this
is our home and practically all we have left in the world and the income
derived from it is our only living. We
have held it through years of hardship and care and sorrow, looking forward always to the day when the
water question should finally be settled with fairness and consideration for
all. Indians and whites alike; with the
happy possibility of restoring the fields to once their original cultivation
and beauty.
Instead, we have at our door
acres and acres of devastated land that can never be made the same, and the
knowledge that all this was caused first by carelessness for need of water gate
and secondly, by the deliberate indifference of those in charge of land that
is, indeed our all.
2
In 1913 Pearl met Austin
Garfield McManus at the home of friends in Pasadena ,
a sleepy community nestled beneath the Sierra Madre mountains in northeast Los Angeles County Austin had qualified for a broker’s
license. They talked about getting
married someday. Austin
could use his knowledge, connections, and
expertise to help Pearl gather all the loose
pieces of unsurveyed, unrecorded, “undivided-interest” land which the McCallums
in Palm Springs
would have a claim to. “You don’t need a
will from your mother,” he told her.
“We’ll find out what’s there, type it up and get her to quit-claim it
all to you.”
“She’ll never do that,” Pearl complained. “She expects everything to go to me and May’s
children; and if May’s children get involved, we’ll never straighten out the
mess my brother Harry left us in.”
“Let’s figure it all out,” Austin told her, “get it all down on
paper. Then we’ll draw up a quit-claim
deed for your mother to sign. Maybe
she’ll sign if she sees what we’ve done to clarify the situation.”
Early in 1914, fate offered Pearl an opportunity. She was brought into contact with the estates
of her father’s old Syndicate partners.
Once again, as in 1908, John Guthrie’s estate inventory of 1897 would be
considered, although the “Final Accounting and Distribution” previously had
been issued in “Order 19449 in 1908.” On
January 14, 1914 Pearl received a letter from
Archibald J. Treat, “Attorney and Counselor-at-Law” in San Francisco representing the O.C. Miller
Estate Company and the Henry C. Campbell Company [in the following letter,
emphasis is added]:
To: Miss Pearl McCallum
1485 Park Avenue
Riverside , California
Dear Madam:
Since my letter to you of the 14th I have
received a reply to my letter to the Riverside Abstract Company asking about
Section 25, Township 4 South, Range 4 East . . . In the decree of distribution
in the matter of the estate of your father the only reference to Section 25 . .
. As stated in my letter to you, there is
no record of a deed from the Southern Pacific Railroad Company to your father
of W. ½ of Section 25, and the N. ½ of the N.E. ¼ of Sec. 25.
It occurred to me that your father might have had a deed to the land last described which he had failed to record, and that the decree of distribution, a copy of which appears in the abstract in my possession, would indicate this. But as stated, there is no reference in the decree of final distribution.
. . . On the other hand, I feel quite sure that your father would not have deeded an interest to this land unless he owned it.
It occurred to me that your father might have had a deed to the land last described which he had failed to record, and that the decree of distribution, a copy of which appears in the abstract in my possession, would indicate this. But as stated, there is no reference in the decree of final distribution.
. . . On the other hand, I feel quite sure that your father would not have deeded an interest to this land unless he owned it.
It occurs to me that there
may still be amongst your father’s papers an unrecorded deed and I write to
suggest that you make a search to see if you cannot clear up the matter. Signed:
A.J. Treat”
Section 25 was acreage southwest of the village, part of
which was later developed as the Smoke Tree Ranch. Tracing ownership to Section 25, Pearl
re-discovered that in John Guthrie’s 1897 inventory, he owned a “Possessory
claim on the Southeast quarter and the South half of the Northeast quarter of
Section 25 . . . and improvements hereon. . . .” No
acreage given, but the property had been cross-deeded to Emily by her children
in 1898. As to the remainder of
Section 25, Treat writes that the Riverside Title & Abstract Company cannot
render any title to this portion of Section 25.
Pearl
knew this and this was her purpose in writing to Treat. She was trying to get title to all of Harry’s
“Syndicate” property which had been partitioned to him by the heirs in 1898,
and therefore had passed back into the family after his death. Pearl
now realized she must get her mother to quit claim all of this “Syndicate” land
to her—otherwise May’s children would have a one-half claim to it after Emily’s
death.
But there were problems.
Pearl
had learned from Treat that a portion of Section 25 was not in the 1897 inventory and so not cross-deeded to Harry. On January 20 and 24, 1914 Pearl wrote to H.A. Campbell. Then on the 24th wrote to
Treat. Treat refers to these letters in
his letter to Pearl
on
February 4.
Received yours of January 24th:
I note what you say about the quit-claim deeds to your
father from the Southern Pacific Railroad Company which you have found. It is as to Section 25 that we desire proof
to title . . .
I have your letter of January 20th addressed to
H.A. Campbell, together with enclosures . . . return the original to you as
requested . . . From this letter of your father to W.A. Purrington dated March
17th (evidently your father’s copy) it would seem that your father
had a contract with the Southern Pacific Company to purchase section 25,
because lands in that section are included in the offer of your father to Mr.
Purrington. It is probable that this contract was never recorded . . .
I have received reply to my letter to the Riverside
Abstract Company stating that they will give a certificate of title to us for
the sum of Three Hundred Dollars, but that it will take about a month to
furnish it. They did not give the all
important information desired, which is whether
they can show clear title to the lands involved in certain designated persons,
the O.C. Miller Estate Company, Henry C. Campbell Co., and the heirs of your
father, or such of them as may hold the legal title. [Pearl was
well aware this meant Harry as owner of these “lands” passing his interests to
Emily, which later Emily to Pearl
and May’s children after May died].
The O.C. Miller
Estate Company and the Henry C. Campbell Co. are desirous of disposing of their
interest in Palm Valley
Very truly yours, A.J. Treat.
Very truly yours, A.J. Treat.
At last! The
Syndicate partners now had indeed entered into Pearl ’s
efforts to secure title to all her father’s land in Palm Springs !
She realized she now was close to achieving that end. But she must get her mother to quit claim all
titles to her. Emily could pass on at
any moment. Pearl
had placed her in Loma Linda Sanitarium close to Redlands ,
north of Riverside in San Bernardino County
Following is an obituary from the Riverside Press, Friday,
May 24, 1914, discovered among Pearl ’s
effects after her death in 1966. We see
may now view from this that Emilie is no longer a shadowy creature. Here,
published for the first time since its publication in 1914 is the obituary
obviously written by Pearl
herself. No one then living could’ve
known anything about Emily’s past:
MRS. J.G. McCALLUM
______________
Widow of Former Judge Passes
Away While in This City
_______
_____
A long and eventful life came to a peaceful end last
evening when Mrs. Emily McCallum, widow of Judge J.G. McCallum, passed away at
the home of Mrs. B. Rhoades, 1485
Park Avenue , at the age of 72 years. The funeral service will be held in the
Rosedale chapel, Los Angeles ,
tomorrow afternoon.
Mrs. McCallum came to California
in 1859 [age 17] from New Haven , Connecticut by way of the Isthmus of
Panama . She was a passenger
on the boat, Orizaba , that was afterward burned
at San Francisco
with great loss of life. The deceased
went to live in Jackson , Amador County Los Angeles in 1884. They made their home at 243 West Adams Street many years. For 26 years she lived in Palm Springs , where Judge McCallum owned
extensive land interests, now owned by his daughter.
The deceased had been an invalid 14 years and although
shut indoors all this time, she was of a cheerful, Christian disposition and a
patient sufferer that won many friends.
She was a faithful member of Calvary Presbyterian Church.
She leaves a daughter, Mrs. Austin Garfield McManus, whose
home is in Pasadena . Mrs. McManus was married two weeks ago in Orange and was called from her honeymoon trip to Oceanside and San
Diego by the serious illness of her mother.
___________________
No mention of Emily’s grandchildren as survivors: John McCallum, Katherine, Jane, and Marjorie
Forline. Although an invalid 14 years [since 1900] and although shut indoors all this time, Emily had managed to live in Chicago
from 1900 to 1904; at the Adobe in Palm Springs ,
and in Los Angeles . She died, not at 1485 Park Avenue in Riverside but was a patient at Loma Linda
Sanitarium. (The ledgers for the period
January, 1914, through July, 1914 are missing, so this can’t be verified.)
A search for Emily’s death certificate was made in the
records of Riverside
County San
Bernardino County
3
The Quit Claim Deed dated May 21, 1914, the day of Emily’s
death, and purportedly signed by Emily with an “X” was notarized “in my office”
by Lyman Evans, then district attorney of the City of Riverside , witnessed by “Jean F.
McIntyre.” No Jean F. McIntyre is found
in the City Register of that period. Her
identity to this day remains a mystery.
Most of the property listed in the Quit Claim deed is
“Syndicate” property, 540 acres in and around the McCallum Ranch in Section 15,
extending from the mountain to Main Street—today’s Palm Canyon Drive; all 540
acres originally belonging to Harry by
Emily, May, and Pearl’s cross-deed to him in 1898. The Quit Claim Deed represents that Emily’s
owned one hundred percent. But Emily did
not own one hundred percent. After
Harry’s death in 1901, the undivided property would be apportioned sixty-six
percent to Emily, a third to Pearl, and a third to May; after May’s death in
1908, Emily’s one-third interest would pass to May’s children, but only if she
died intestate. Only Emily’s Quit Claim
Deed could disinherit May’s children at this time. If Emily had not signed the Deed, May’s heirs
would have an interest in 91.8 acres in Palm
Springs .
A survey of “Syndicate” and other property found (or not
found) in the Quit Claim Deed is revealing.
Not included
in Quit-Claim Deed:
In John Guthrie’s 1897 Inventory – Cross-deeded
by family to Harry in 1898:
Block 22-Lots 4, 10, 11, 31; Block 25-Lots 9, 10, 11, 12,
33, 32
Included in
Quit-Claim Deed:
In John Guthrie’s 1897 Inventory – Not cross-deeded by family to
Harry in 1898 –
Block 18-Lot 9. Not in John Guthrie’s Inventory: Block
22, Lot 2.
Thus Pearl
had typed into the Quit Claim Deed property found in her father’s 1897
Inventory, but not partitioned to Harry in 1898. All of the property in Block 25, and four
Lots in Block 22 was not included.
Eventually, through a series of litigations and claims, Pearl
did get clear title to all of the ranch property, with the exception of Block
18, Lot 9 which although in John Guthrie’s
1897 Inventory, had not been cross-deeded by the family to Harry in 1898.
May’s estate was petitioned for on July 15, 1914 by Wm. H.
Polkinghorn to be appointed “Special Administrator” showing May’s “undivided
interest in” Lots 7 and 8 in Block “B” – “separate property which she inherited from her father J.G.
McCallum.” All May’s children are
listed as heirs. Ten days later the same
Polkinghorn petitioned for Emily’s estate showing her “undivided interest in”
the same property – “separate which she inherited from her husband.” Again, all heirs are listed. On October 16, 1914, Florilla M. White and
Cordelia B. White, claimed title to this property, revealing a chain of
inheritance; and that Harry’s estate and property passed to his mother, Emily.
Thus followed a series of complex litigations Pearl had to endure
throughout the 1920s. On April 16, 1920,
Dr. Emmet Rixford of 1795
California Street in San
Francisco wrote to Pearl : “Let’s get together and agree on
settlement. Of course the taxes which we
have kept up all these years would have to be compensated for.”
By 1921, Pearl had hired
Adair & Winder / Riverside . On April 8 they wrote her concerning “all
your property interests in and near Palm
Springs ” [emphasis added]:
Riverside Abstract Company is in possession of valuable
information concerning your property
interests which could never be secured any other way excepting through them .
. . much of this information came from old records, which later were
photographed and are now held by the
Abstract Company; other information came from his experience [Mr.
Schaffer], which one could never secure from the records. In addition to that both Mr. Wells and Mr.
Haymond have learned a great deal of information of the early days and
elsewhere. Furthermore the Riverside
Abstract Company has made title searches covering Palm Springs territory for other people . . .
In the second place, I have just enough information to
lead me to believe that there is a
possibility that you have a record interest in lands around Palm Springs
On August 22, Dr. Emmet Rixford again wrote “with a view
of perfecting title to property in and around Palm Springs , generally referred to as syndicate
property. . . . contemplated by Mr. and Mrs. McManus: having search made on the title of all the
properties including the tax title properties, for the purpose of bringing suit to quiet title. . . . we would suggest that all of the
property be deeded to one individual or some Company, to be thereafter conveyed
to the respective parties entitled thereto under the agreement of division . .
.”
As to Lots 1 and 4 in Block 29 in Section 15, December 13,
1921, Cornelia White, the estate of James Adams, deceased, and Lois Kellogg,
Pearl M. McManus was vested of record in H.C. Campbell, James Adams, J.G.
McCallum and O.C. Miller, “but that their respective interests thereto are not
disclosed and cannot be determined by the official records on file . . . of San
Diego and Riverside Counties. . . . It is further stipulated and agreed that
whatever interest in and to said property was
owned by Harry F. McCallum at the time of his death, in the year 1902 [11
months off the correct date of death], vested
absolutely in his mother, Emily McCallum.” [and by inference to all Emily’s
heirs at the time of her death].
Two days later, another stipulation was offered by Cornelia
White and the estate of James Adams, deceased, as to Pearl’s title and interest
held by the same parties, their title and interest on June 1, 1888 – close to
the time of the rift between John Guthrie and his Syndicate partners; the
stipulation offering vested interest of record in and to Pearl M. McManus in and to the real property of record held by J.G.
McCollum[sic] on June 1, 1888.
Harry’s estate again was brought into the picture on June
26, 1923 when Pearl asked the Security Title Insurance and Guarantee Company
(affiliated with The Riverside Abstract Company), F.H. Wells, Vice President,
to bring suit “. . . for the purpose OF SEGREGATING THE INTERESTS OF Mrs.
McManus from the interests of any other owners holding with her undivided
interests . . . followed by a handwritten acceptance from “A.G. McManus,
Pearl M. McManus by A.G. McManus, her attorney in fact.” But the court ruled that Pearl M. McManus did
not hold any “undivided interests” because the property had not been listed in
the Quit Claim Deed of 1914 and Pearl ’s
mother didn’t have title to it. It was
in a sense “in limbo” in Harry’s estate and had not been probated.
Almost four months passed.
In later years, the husband of May’s daughter Jane told the story that
during this time “there was a frantic search for a will.” On October 10, 1923, Pearl petitioned for probate of Harry’s estate—his
Will annexed [note incorrect information here emphasized in italics]:
Petition for Probate states that Harry died on or about the 1st day of August, 1902, in the County of Los Angeles
. . . was a resident of the County of Riverside . . . An undivided
interest in and to certain real property in and near Palm Springs, California,
the value of which at the time of death,
was less than $10,000 [earlier probates of Harry’s estate had stipulated
the estate had no value—the “Syndicate” property was still undivided] . . .
holographic will bearing date the 23rd day of December, 1897, . . .
the last will and testament of said deceased . . . That Mrs. J.G. McCallum is
named in said will. . . that said Mrs. J.G. McCallum is deceased . . . heirs at
law of said testator: Pearl McManus, a
sister, Marjorie Forline, Mrs. Carl Skolfield (Jane), Mrs. Bernard Plata
[should be de la Plata] (Katherine), and Jack Forline, the four of whom are the
children of the deceased sister of decedent (May).
On October 31, order was issued admitting Harry’s Will to
probate, Pearl McManus McCallum appointed Administratrix with the Will
annexed. In effect all of Harry’s land
discovered by Pearl
by title search or from the family partition of Syndicate land in 1898 now
belonged to her since he had willed it to his mother in 1897! A Bond dated October 19, 1923 was attached
signed by Lyman Evans and G.E. Dole, attorneys in fact for the United States
Fidelity and Guarantee Company; noting here that Lyman Evans is the notary for
Emily’s Quit Claim Deed.
On February 15, 1924 Adair & Winder wrote to A.G.
McManus, Esq. in re: McManus v. Campbell ,
regarding Lot 9, Block 18, and Section 25:
I have not included lot 9, Block 18, for the reason that
this lot was conveyed from May to Harry
[and from Emily, and Pearl ]
and if I should include it, it would force May’s children into the suit, and
would also prevent the allegations.
Three days later a Complaint in Partition was filed – Pearl vs. a number of
Syndicate Partners regarding land as listed in J.G. McCallum’s inventory of
1897 . . . This complaint states that “said real property was held and owned in
common and in co tenancy by Emily McCallum . . .” which it was only if Harry had left a will. Otherwise, on Harry’s death, Pearl and May would each still retain their one-sixth undivided
interest, since Lot 9, Block 18 was not
partitioned by the family to Harry. May
heirs would still own their one-six interest, plus one-half of their mother’s
2/3 interest, or one-fourth interest together with Pearl ’s one-fourth interest.
These petitions and litigations continued throughout the
1920s and into the 1930s, all of which
concealed the true date of Harry’s death and May’s interest in the Syndicate
property. The question remains,
would Emily knowingly consent to give Pearl property which she, Pearl and May had
cross-deeded to Harry in the 1898 family partition, and in which the family had
only a 27.48% interest?
As to Lot 9, Block 18, on January 27, 1931, it was sold to
Austin McManus from May’s estate, a one-sixth interest, and the same day Austin received a Quit
Claim deed from Campbell & Varney (Syndicate heirs) for one hundred dollars
who had purchased it on April 1, 1927 from James Adams his 5.56% interest. May’s children each received seventy-five dollars
from the sale. And here the question is,
why should not May’s children’s interest
have been fifty percent since Pearl could now
claim title to all of Lot 9, Block 18? It is clear that May’s correct share of land
in Palm Springs
was obfuscated through the years.
From Palm Springs
Today she lives in splendid solitude [Austin
died in 1955] in a huge, Mediterranean villa-like home on the slope of Mt. San
Jacinto
Tragedy is in the past for Mrs. McManus—“I’m so glad I
lived to see it all come out in the sunshine,” she commented some time ago—and
today her eye is on the future and—always—what it holds for Palm Springs.
“I’m a great person not to let myself worry over what
can’t be helped,” she said recently.
Then she smiled happily and added: “Tomorrow’s my day!”
No comments:
Post a Comment