Group III Letters
Here we have grouped together those letters written by George D. Roberts himself. These are important because they show us why the reports from Ralston continued to be favorable, despite Power’s “sell out as fast as possible” letter of September 7, 1870.
We also refer briefly to a letter written to Roberts which makes it clear that the “Mr. Lord” referred to in the McGoodwin letter was Charles H. Lord. Written at Arizona City (which lay directly opposite Fort Yuma on the Colorado River) on May 5, 1870, this letter passes along to Harpending and Roberts various tidbits of information on “the mines.” The recipient of the letter must have known which mines he was referring to, as the author does not refer to them by name. He does, further on in the letter, refer to gold placer-mines near Tucson. He ends the letter by stating that he would be glad to provide Harpending and Roberts with:
Any information in regard to matters when I reach Tucson that will interest you, & at any time I can aid you in the prosecution of your matters in our country I will be glad to do so.
Yours respectfully,
your obt. servant,
C.H.Lord
George D. Roberts to “Dear Harpending”, San Francisco, Sept. 26, 1870
Roberts opens by acknowledging receipt of dispatches from Harpending, and assuring him that his folks are all well. He then informs Harpending that Brown, Ben and Gillette will be arriving at San Francisco “on Wednesday” (September 28th), a little later than anticipated as they had missed the last steamer.
The next few lines of the letter are as follows:
I have another letter from Power, in substance the same as the one I sent you. I enclose the letter. I will see to it that no unfavorable reports are circulated … My idea is for you to go to NY and interest some sharp broker, and sell on the best terms possible.
After some references to “our Mineral Hill folks” and to the fact that “Dore is sick today”, Roberts goes on to instruct Harpending “Don’t fail to sell New Mexico on some terms.”
It appears that Roberts was in the midst of a cash flow crisis; he says that, although Dore has paid him $10,000 on some unspecified transaction, and although he is expecting to receive the balance the following day, if he doesn’t receive it he “will be busted.”
His closing statements are references to “Findley” and “Findley’s friend in England.” “Dore” was Maurice Dore, a San Francisco real-estate auctioneer, head of M. Dore & Co. “Findley” was Thomas Findley who had a long-standing association with Roberts. They had known each other since at least the 1860s. Separately they had each owned mining properties at Grass Valley, Nevada County, CA, and together they were part owners of two mills, the “Merrimac” and the “Union”, at Grass Valley.⁴⁰ Roberts had been part owner and editor of a Grass Valley newspaper in the late 1850s, and several of those who had mining interests there at the same time as Roberts, like Dore, would also be involved in The Great Diamond Hoax of 1872.
Harpending too, had known Roberts since his Grass Valley days. In 1863, Harpending and two associates stood trial on a charge of treason. They had purchased a 90 ton schooner, the “Chapman”, and had it fitted out as a privateer, to sail under letters of marque issued by Jefferson Davis, with the object of disrupting the commerce of the United States, partly by raiding those ships of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company which were carrying bullion. The plan was foiled however when the “Chapman” and her crew were apprehended by Customs officials and police officers in San Francisco on the night that they were due to set sail for the first time. Harpending was subsequently tried, found guilty of treason, and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. He was released after only four months, under a general amnesty. During his trial, amongst the evidence produced was a letter from Harpending to “Roberts of Grass Valley”, dated February 24, 1862. The letter referred, albeit obliquely, to Roberts’ role in the financing of some aspect of Harpending’s treasonous plans.⁴¹
Roberts refers to having received letters from Power, both of a similar nature and both of which he forwarded to Harpending. The September 7th letter from Power must be one of these, and in all probability is the second one, which Roberts says he is enclosing with this letter. We can be fairly certain of this because, in the September 7th letter, Power writes “again I say sell out as fast as possible” suggesting that this is not the first time that he has advised Roberts to do so.
Most telling is Roberts’ statement that he “will see to it that no unfavorable reports are circulated” on the mines at Ralston. It might prove interesting if we could discover exactly how he went about doing this.
George D. Roberts to “Dear Harpending”, Oakland, Nov. 6th, 1870
Roberts begins by informing Harpending that he had received his letter from Santa Fe the previous day. Harpending’s letter had provided Roberts with “full particulars” as to his trip, and Roberts states “of course, I did not let our friends read it.”
The letter contains many references to “Treadwell” who, it appears, was something of a loose cannon, and was fast becoming a thorn in Roberts’ side. Roberts writes of Treadwell’s inquisitiveness over the letter recently received from Santa Fe, and is “fearful that Treadwell will let everyone know that he had discouraging news” and, despite Treadwell having promised Roberts that he would “make no more of the information and impart it to no one”, he had in fact “let the cat out” with the result that many more people now knew of it. Roberts writes of Treadwell “I told him that he did very wrong” and that he is “selfish and unreliable”, also that he, Roberts, had “clipped his wings a little.” Roberts promises to “get even for his meanness.”
As regards Harpending’s letter from Santa Fe, Roberts also writes that “Walton” had felt slighted by not being allowed to read the letter for himself, and Dore had simply been informed that it contained “very satisfactory” information. In response to queries from various people, Roberts’ answer was that Harpending was “going to St. Louis and would probably sell a portion of our mines for a working capital.”
He stresses the importance of Harpending’s mission (to sell in New York), telling Harpending “while you have your hand in, play it for all its worth” and “if you strike the lead, as you think probable, play it for all it is worth.” He tells Harpending that papers are to be forwarded to him the next day “in regard to New Mex. Co. and Burro Co. …You will have full powers to act, and can sell the mines at any price you please. Sell them, or we are sold.” He also says that, if Harpending succeeds with the sale, “we must not divide with all the outsiders.”
It seems that Roberts’ finances had not improved since his letter of September 26th; in fact they had worsened. He instructs Harpending that, should he fail to sell the mines, he was to “try and raise me some money on the Tide Land stock, as that is the only last hope.” Roberts writes that he has promised to pay Tevis $5,000 “on our Sansome matter” the following day, with another $5,000 to follow on the first of the next month, but says “I don’t know where I am to get the money but will raise it some how. Soon as you can get any money, if at all, telegraph me about $20,000.”
There is another reference to Dore who is “in fine spirits about Montgomery Street” and who says he will “have it built up and rented by the time you return.” He also refers to Mary, who “will be in New York by the time this reaches you.” He tells Harpending that he has informed Mrs. Harpending that “you were going to London for a short time.” Mary was the name of Robert’s wife. The Daily Alta California of June 21, 1863, had announced the marriage of George D. Roberts to Miss Mary Emily Hall. The wedding had taken place at Grass Valley the previous week.
From this letter we can sense the level of intrigue and deception being employed. Roberts is obviously keeping certain key information away from various people, and is passing along false information on Harpending’s whereabouts and purposes, and is greatly concerned about what he perceives to be Treadwell’s instability.
Leonard L. Treadwell had every reason to be concerned. Documents and newspaper items indicate that he suffered a number of financial setbacks, and by 1871, Treadwell and Company “Importers and Dealers in Agricultural Implements” was officially insolvent. Amongst Harpending’s business papers is a letterhead of the Bank of California dated May 27, 1870, and addressed to Treadwell. It informs Treadwell that the sum of $10,000 would be due for repayment by him on the 30th of that month.
Treadwell also had another association with Harpending. The two of them, together with J. D. Fry, were the Incorporators and first three Trustees of the Montgomery Street Real Estate Company, incorporated at San Francisco in December of 1868. In April of the following year at the Company’s annual meeting, W. C. Ralston was elected Company President, H. G. Walton Secretary and S. Heydenfeldt Legal Advisor to the Company; Treadwell was elected Vice-President and Asbury Harpending, Actuary.⁴²
The discord between Treadwell and Roberts would not end any time soon, despite Roberts’ claim to have clipped Treadwell’s wings. In September of 1874, Roberts would be indicted for having obtained money from Treadwell under false pretenses, an indictment which arose from the fraudulent sale of the “Burro-Burro” mines.⁴³ A few days later Roberts in turn commenced a civil suit against Treadwell, claiming $50,000 in recompense for the “malicious prosecution” initiated by Treadwell. The newspaper report states that Roberts had been indicted, at Treadwell’s insistence, on the charge of having, on June 15, 1872, defrauded Treadwell of $50,000, the details of the alleged fraud are given as follows:
Roberts pretended to Treadwell that the New Mexico Mining Company of which he was a principal owner, owned silver mines of great richness and value in New Mexico Territory, and known as the Burro Burro Pyramid Range mines, and that he had seen and received from said mines a large quantity of rich silver-bearing ore, which had recently been raised, and on being assayed had been found to be of extraordinary richness, whereas the ore which had been received and assayed did not come in whole or in part from the Burro Burro or Pyramid Range mines, and this Roberts knew, but falsely represented the matter, for the purpose of defrauding Treadwell by inducing him to purchase a large number of shares of the stock of the New Mexico Mining Company, which he succeeded in doing to the extent of $50,000. The case was tried in the Municipal Court on the 1st instant, and resulted in Roberts’ acquittal. The plaintiff [Roberts] claims to have suffered in character and business affairs in consequence of the prosecution.⁴⁴
On September 11, 1874, the Daily Alta California published a lengthy letter from Roberts’ counsel, one of whom was S. Heydenfeldt. It refers to two indictments having been brought against Roberts the previous February for obtaining money under false pretenses in relation to the mines at Ralston, and to the associated inducement of Treadwell as described above. In one of these indictments Harpending had been named alongside Roberts. This charge had been dropped; the other, Roberts had been keen to bring to trial. Treadwell, however, had posted multiple applications for postponements on the grounds that he was unable to proceed without the testimony of several key witnesses – first Harpending, then “one Myers”, then a Mr. Renney and lastly “one Lord.” The letter also gives the names of those witnesses upon whose testimony the indictment was found: L. L. Treadwell, Henry R. Seidendorf, M. L. Power, C. D. Cleveland and F. A. Baux.
After the fourth postponement the court decreed that there was no just cause for any further delay and fixed the date for commencement of the trial. When the case was called, however, the prosecution announced that they intended to abandon the case on the grounds that Treadwell was still unable to produce his witnesses; this despite the fact that Roberts himself had procured two of them – Myers and Renney.
Counsel ends the letter by stating that “Mr. Roberts desires us to state that, immediately on the termination of the case, he commenced an action against Mr. Treadwell for the malicious prosecution of this indictment, in which action Mr. Treadwell will have ample opportunity to substantiate his charges.”
Also of note here is the report in the Daily Alta California of September 9, 1874, stating that “a young man named Wm. D. Brown” had been arrested the previous day; he too had been indicted by the Grand Jury in connection with the “Burro Burro mining matters, in which Treadwell was a loser.” Charged with conspiracy, Brown pleaded not guilty at the September 11th court session. No further information could be found about this case.
The Tide Land Reclamation Company
To return to Roberts’ letter of November 6, 1870, one of the most interesting references he makes is to Tide Land stock. Between the years of 1855 and 1872, the State of California passed laws which provided for the disposal of swamplands and overflowed lands, the major areas of which were to be found in the region of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. One of these laws, passed in 1868, abolished any limit on the number of acres of this land which could be claimed by any one individual person; immediately prior to this the limit had been 640 acres. The land, once it was reclaimed by the building of levees, was extremely fertile, producing excellent crops of hay, cereals, potatoes, beans, fruits and other vegetables.
Sucheng Chan⁴⁵ provides three examples of land owners in the Delta region who had undertaken reclamation in order to farm and protect their land. He then goes on to write about George D. Roberts who “on the other hand, undertook reclamation purely as a speculative venture.” He describes how Roberts bought large areas of swamplands at very low prices from the State of California, reclaimed the land, and then resold it as soon as possible for high profits. Roberts himself claimed to have owned over a period of time one-quarter of a million acres of these swamplands.
Roberts was President of the Tide Land Reclamation Company. Incorporated in San Francisco in 1869, the Company was capitalized in the sum of $12 million and initially offered for sale 120,000 shares at $100 a share. The first seven trustees of the Company were G. D. Roberts (President), Archibald Peachy, Lloyd Tevis, Edward B. Dorsey, Solomon Heydenfeldt, Layfette Maynard and John S. Hagar.⁴ Roberts estimated that he and the Tide Land Reclamation Company had, at least partially, reclaimed some 30-40 thousand acres of swamplands using primarily, as did most other reclaimants, the labor of Chinese immigrants. It is estimated that at one time Roberts had between three and four thousand Chinese laborers in his employ, paying them about $1 a day.⁴⁷
In all, Roberts is said to have purchased some 250,000 acres of swampland at prices ranging from 50 cents to 3 dollars an acre. He split off 120,000 acres to form The Tidelands Reclamation Company. In 1870, the Company was experiencing financial problems.⁴⁸
©2007-2024 Jim & Erica Parson
REFERENCES FOR THIS INSTALLMENT
⁴⁰Byrne (1867).
⁴¹The case of United States vs. Greathouse, Harpending and Rubery came to trial in October of 1863. The three men were accused of treason, having been “indicted for the crime of engaging in and giving aid and comfort to the existing rebellion against the United States”. [Daily Alta California. October 17, 1863].
Among the evidence produced by the prosecution was a proclamation written by Harpending, and described as “a treasonable address to the people of California, calling on them to throw off the authority of the United States.” Also produced was a copy of Harpending’s plan to capture Alcatraz and Fort Point, and other letters written by and to Harpending, including that dated February 24, 1862. In this letter, Harpending informs Roberts that “nearly all is arranged, but $2,000 are lacking”, adding that he could not put all of the particulars in his letter – presumably for reasons of secrecy and safety. [Daily Alta California. October 7, 1863].
⁴²Dana, J. (1936) The Man Who Built San Francisco. A Study Of Ralston’s Journey With Banners. New York: The Macmillen Company. Page 125.
⁴³Daily Alta California. September 1, 1874.
⁴⁴Daily Alta California. September 4, 1874.
⁴⁵Chan, S. (1986) This Bittersweet Soil: The Chinese In California Agriculture 1860-1910. Berkeley: University of California Press.
⁴⁶Ibid.
⁴⁷The Heritage We Renounce. Sacramento Delta Blues. Chinese Workers and the Building of the California Levees, 1860-1880. Revolutionary Worker #894. February 16, 1997. http://www.rwor.org/a/firstvol/890-899/894/chines.htm Accessed December 1, 2010.
⁴⁸ Reclamation District 999. http://rd999.org Accessed – 5/18/2024
Leave a Reply