by Paul R. Spitzzeri
The controversy that raged in Pomona in November 1891 regarding lands for which titles were uncertain, and with attorney Patrick C. Tonner and Pomona Land and Water Company President Benjamin S. Nichols threatened with bodily harm because of allegations they were foisting a fraud upon settlers, included a series of heated public meetings at the town’s Opera House.
When Lugarda Alvarado de Palomares, initially linked to Nichols and Tonner, consented to an interview, translated by her son, Francisco, Jr., and adamantly denied any knowledge of what Tonner, her lawyer and agent, was doing with properties that she assumed were sold cleanly and without any cloud over them, the committee heading the movement to clarify the matter accepted her explanations and heaped praise on her and her son for their attitude, forthrightness and willingness to help settle the matter.
In its 11 November edition, the Los Angeles Herald updated readers on “The Pomona War,” observing that overt tensions seemed to have diminished, though there remained “a determination to probe the land business of P.C. Tonner to the bottom, which bode little good to him and those connected with him.” Fortunately, for the 20-year resident of the area, the ringleaders of the movement “do not now counsel any summary methods of dealing with Tonner and his associates.”
As noted, Señora Palomares’ remarks were such that they “centered the whole wrath of the community” on Nichols and Tonner, with the former seen racing through town in his horse-and-buggy the prior night, but otherwise staying out of sight, though “unlike Tonner is still at Pomona, and has not run away from the volcano which has been stirred up.” The reporter spoke to an unnamed committee member, who offered,
The attempt of P.C. Tonner is very plain . . . and the statement by Mrs. Palomares throws a flood of light on his transactions, so that we feel we can not only clear up our land titles, but have abundant proof for a criminal indictment against Tonner—the relation of Dr. Nichols to the scheme is not so plan, but the people here generally believe that he has had something to do with the matter.
Additionally, it was remarked that Tonner “used her as he would, through her unfamiliarity with English and business,” recall that, when he was a teacher at the Palomares School in the Seventies, he was said to have earned the trust of Spanish-speakers in the community. This allowed him to take the two-thirds interest in some of her former property and “swindled the purchasers by bleeding them for an advance upon the original purchase price to secure a release from his trumped-up cloud on the titles.”
A Pomona business figure, also identified, speculated on Nichols’ motivation in the alleged plot, observing that Nichols was the main interest in the land and water company and the properties deeded to his relation, E.W. Burr on Bridgeport, Connecticut, “includes the source of the water supply of the City Water company.” The speculation was that Nichols hoped to use this source of the precious fluid to “crush the City Water company and gain a monopoly of the business” of supplying water in the area.
Despite this, the source continued, events developed in such a way that Nichols was headed off from completing his plans “and he will never be able to make the scheme work.” It was expected that he would also relinquish control of the land and water company, his position being further weakened by reports that residents were seeking to transfer their water connections from his firm to the City company.
It was also reported that “during the day P.C. Tonner was around the courthouse a considerable portion of the time and seemed to have restrained any bibulous tendencies [meaning, he was sober]” and “he seemed quite uneasy, and showed a decided preference for the inside of the building.” This appeared to indicate that he was concerned about being confronted by enemies, while his sojourn at the courthouse perhaps regarded any potential legal action, such as the convening of a grand jury or filings related to the lands in question.
Yet, he made another visit, this one to the offices of the Los Angeles Times, which published “Tonner’s Statement” and “His Version of the Pomona Land Trouble.” He informed the paper that he was Lugarda Palomares’ attorney since 1876, shortly after his admission to the bar, and, if the reports of her remarks were true, “I will at once redeed to her lands and interests which I hold only as her trustee, and close my business connections with her.”
The lawyer stated that, nearly a decade before, she sold, through him, tracts to the Pomona Land and Water Company, with some of purchase price paid as a down payment, with the rest of the money to go to her when “she removed the cloud which was upon her title,” this concerning a suit to challenge a partition made of the Rancho San José in the mid-1840s. An 1884 decision by the state supreme court, he continued, “made the owners tenants in common.”
Incidentally, an outgrowth of this was her transferring some 4,500 acres to the San José Ranch Company “on which the town of San Dimas now stands.” Tonner went into detail about other transactions involving Señora Palomares and her lands and remarked “the various transfers to Mrs. Palomares conveyed what is called the cloud on the titles to the lands over which this excitement has arisen.” He continued that “in December 1888, or in January 1889, Mrs. Palomares deeded to me (in trust, though not so stipulated in the conveyance,” this parenthetical seemingly important, “all of the undivided two-thirds of the ranch.”
Tonner insisted that “I never paid her any consideration for the land or interest deeded and never at any time or to any one claimed I owned it” and he added he told others that he was Palomares’ agent. When he undertook arrangements for quit-claim deeds, taking only notary fees as his compensation, it was “upon her order,” while Tonner asserted that “I also had her verbal authority to use my discretion as to the amount I should charge in all cases where not specifically directed by her.” He claimed he did not take fees for deeds to veterans and widows and “these are facts well known at Pomona.”
As to her remarks that she did not intend to deed any interests to Tonner to property sold to others and that “as she cannot read or write English, she depended upon you to put in the deed only the unsold portions of her land,” the reply was,
She may say that, but the deed itself excepts from it just such lands as she says she meant to convey. I am certain that one of her children wrote her name to the deed—I think it was her son Francisco. Any how, the exact force of the deed was fully explained to her, and she understood it fully. Of course, if she and her son both swear to the contrary, it would place the blame upon me.
Tonner also explained that the 300-acre deed to Burr was because of a bonded debt of $100,000 incurred by the Pomona Land and Water Company and Burr was the trustee for the bondholders of a mortgage and, moreover, approved the loan. Beyond this, it was asserted that the Citizens’ Water Company had wells that “very seriously diminished the flow in the wells of Dr. Nichols” and his firm, so “the only motive which the Doctor had was to guard the interests of his company and add to the security of the bondholders.”
Tonner allowed that Nichols paid him (he demurred on the specific amount) to execute the deed to Burr, while the attorney claimed to be ignorant of specifics regarding it and Burr’s particular role. As to allegations, Tonner issued the deed to forestall legal action on quieting titles to the disputed lands, he uttered, “this is nonsense” as suits could have filed regardless. He denied any conspiracy “to wrongfully get this water-bearing land” and that Burr likely was unaware of Nichols’ interest in securing as much water as possible.
Tonner also claimed he offered to file a test case, “but none of the land owners accepted,” while he denied charging $150 an acre for quit claims, saying that the most he received as $50, though in a tussle with a lawyer from the east, he demanded $200, though the opponent backed off and Tonner took his $50. Again, he told the Times:
I am perfectly willing to deed back to Mrs. Palomares all of her interests now in my name, and she can give quit-claims to all the people out there if she wants to, but it is not fair to me that I should be accused of having deceived her or exceeded my authority. This accusation charges me with a crime. I have never pretended that her claim was an equitable one—but it is a legal claim. I did not make the facts upon which the claim was established.
Regarding his decamping to Los Angeles, Tonner said he did so “because I was advised that I was in personal danger if I remained there” and he “did not want to do anything that would increase the excitement.” He professed to being comfortable with a grand jury investigation and believed he would not be indicted.
He added “I cannot tell to what extent Mrs. Palomares may be induced by fright or other causes to repudiate what she has done, but I will stand by the record and try to present all the facts” if called to testify before a grand jury.” The paper, however, ended its coverage with:
It will be seen that Mr. Tonner practically corroborates all that has been said by the other side, but lays all the blame on Mrs. Palomares. He realizes that if she would deny what he claims to be the facts he is placed in a very unpleasant position.
Several days went by until the Times published a piece headed by “Tonner’s Record” with a subtitle of “A Checkered Career in Nevada and Northern California” and which clearly was calculated to sully his name and reputation. The piece began with “since P.C. Tonner has again loomed up into unenviable notoriety in connection with the Pomona land title troubles, the people of that town, as well as others who are interested, have been quietly at work digging up his past record, which appears to be a rather shady one from the time he first appeared on his cost.
Citing “a gentleman well informed on the subject,” the paper published a rather damning, if entirely circumstantially derived, portrait. In summer 1864, the catalog began, Tonner arrived at the silver mine boom town of Virginia City, Nevada. having evidently withdrawn from the Roman Catholic Santa Clara College near San Jose in California, and wanted to convert to the Episcopalian Church “as he had conscientious scruples” about Catholicism and teach in a school to soon be opened. Asked for references, Tonner had none, but he reportedly said “he must have some money or he would be compelled to enlist” in the Union Army fighting in the Civil War.
After rejection, Tonner apparently turned to the Methodist minister, to no avail, before he returned to the Catholic fold and endeavored to help raise funds for a school. Some $700 was collected and kept in a room at a school Tonner operated because, the story went, he convinced the priest involved that banks could not be trusted. One November evening, however, locals were awakened by Tonner’s bellowing and the priest and others found him saying “that the place had been robbed, all the money taken” and the criminals got away despite Tonner’s firing a pistol at them. The priest, it was continued, “immediately denounced Tonner as the thief” and there was an arrest and a trial.
By the time the case was called, Tonner evidently became a Protestant and his defense attorney argued that “the poor fellow was persecuted by [the priest] because he was about to turn Protestant and that it was simply a case of religious persecution.” The jury ended up voting for an acquittal, but the charges were refiled, though the outcome, based on the same defense, was that Tonner was released pending that “half of the money be returned to [the priest] and half retained by the attorney for Tonner.”
Returning to Santa Clara, Tonner obtained a teaching certificate, but it was related that this “was revoked for gross immoral and unprofessional conduct,” though nothing was adduced to support this claim. His next stop was in Monterey County and teaching at a school until he was dismissed “for still more disgraceful conduct” and “his departure was hastened by an indignant father of one of his female pupils, armed with a shot gun.” The account then observed that Tonner migrated south to this region some two decades prior “and his career here is well-known.” This included his arrest in 1873 on an accusation of the rape of a 14-year old Palomares School student, who got into some wine served at a party at his residence, though all that could be proved was that he took her into his house and put her in a bed and County Judge Ygnacio Sepúlveda released Tonner stating there was no evidence of any wrongdoing.
The unnamed source for these allegations told the Times:
He has belonged to every political party, and almost every church denomination represented in the county and although he has been a prominent disciple of Tom Paine [the writer of Common Sense and The Rights of Man], and a brilliant exemplar of his teachings, it would create no surprise, to those who know him, to see him yet as a leader in the Salvation Army beating the big drum—if there is any money in it—if he is only given rope enough.
In its number of the 19th, the Los Angeles Express reported that Tonner met with a Pomona committee and “it is understood the matter will be quietly settled, provided the grand jury takes no action” with the complaint filed against him, which could be interpreted as some admission of guilt on the part of the attorney.
The following day’s Times informed readers of another mass meeting at the Pomona Opera House, with future (1899-1903) Homestead owner Fred J. Smith, one of those affected by the controversy, offering that “everything is progressing satisfactorily” with the committee’s work and reminding the audience that “some advantage was gained in having quit-claim deeds” although “the only way to have a perfectly clear title is to have the lands set aside by [land] commissioners to the owners in severalty [sole ownership].”
An unnamed lawyer for Señora Palomares reiterated her position and stated that “if Tonner would quit-claim the interests back to her she would give quit-claims to the owners of the land for $5 an acre, or about the cost of the [filing] papers, etc.” and it was added that, of the thousands of dollars Tonner collected from the “tenants in common,” she received by $200. The attorney also denounced Nichols by remarking to both applause and groans:
They say there is no honor among thieves. There may be sympathy among thieves; the doctor may have sympathy amounting almost to brother love for P.C. Tonner. He has sympathy for the American eagle on the back of a silver dollar, but it is that sympathy that the dog has for the game he devours. It is the sympathy of possession, and he is reaching out for more.
First National Bank cashier Stoddard Jess, who went on to a long career in Los Angeles financial circles, counseled getting all titles concerned clear and free and added, “these meetings have shown that where any scheme for blackmailing the citizens arises the people are clearly capable of joining to suppress him,” which earned him acclamation.
Committee member and affected owner John E. Packard read a letter from Susan Mills in which she remarked that no request was made to remove Nichols, her relative, from his position “and that the Doctor was held in the highest esteem and confidence” by investors in the Pomona Land and Water Company. Moreover, she asserted that, “the Doctor sought the best interests not only of the company but if all interested in the claims made by P.C. Tonner.”
Packard rejoined that “B.S. Nichols must get out of town, if the Pomona Land and Water Company is to be a success” and clarified, “there is a settled belief that we don’t want Tonner and Nichols to live among us,” while another representative reminded the attendees that Mills’ late husband, Cyrus, engaged in “a straight-out seal” when he came to the area and filed a claim for water from San Antonio Canyon” and then obliquely referred to talk that, “if Mills should [have been] successful he would go into the cañon some day and forget to come out,” which seems to have indicated that he would have been killed.
The 4 December number of the Herald mentioned that among the previous day’s deed filings was one from Tonner to Señora Palomares “conveying to her his title to certain Pomona lands.” This led the paper to add that “Mrs. Palomares has expressed her desire to deed to the people who occupy the lands, and who thought they owned them, until Tonner’s deed clouded the title.” The result was that the owners would soon have “their title clear, and everybody concerned is expected to be correspondingly happy.”
In its issue of 21 December, the Times covered another gathering at the Pomona venue with those present able “to jollify on account of the final removal of all clouds from the lands” because Francisco Palomares, Jr. arrived from Los Angeles to deliver the quit-claim deeds his mother arranged “covering all the lands in dispute.” When Palomares stated that it was the “great pleasure” of him and his mother to deliver on the promise they made, “his remarks were greeted with deafening applause.”
Frank L. Palmer, acting as trustee, told Francisco, “your mother has done a noble act, and she merits the lasting gratitude of this community” adding “I am sure that I voice the sentiment of this community when I say all honor to the name of Palomares.” A resolution was passed thanking Lugarda for her efforts and that it would be published in a town newspaper. Palmer pledged to move quickly on issuing deeds to affected owners and to do so without payment, while proclaiming,
Fellow citizens, Pomona comes out of this fight with clear titles and with clean hands. We have won the respect of our neighbors, and we have maintained our self-respect. Let us stand by each other; let us take fresh pride in our little city and let public sentiment declare and proclaim Pomona to the front!
Another resolution decried the extortion of Nichols and Tonner and called upon them “to remove the shame and disgrace forced upon us by their residence among us,” though both men remained Pomona residents and Nichols continued to head Pomona Land and Water and Tonner to practice his profession as a lawyer.
Yet, the next day’s Herald reported that “P.C. Tonner, the attorney who recently sprang into notoriety . . . at Pomona on account of his operations . . . was arrested in this city last night and locked up in the station as drunk.” Having a “lively time” during the day, Tonner obtained a horse and buggy and went on a drive, but apparently did so without informing anyone or paying. At the end of November, the Times briefly noted that Tonner was in Pomona and said to be “very much under the influence of ‘booze.'”
The Times of the 23rd included, in its real estate filings list, the record of Lugarda Palomares executing a trust deed to Palmer. This ended the controversy that, at one time, involved some Pomonans calling for the lynching of her, Nichols and Tonner, but we’ll end this post in several days with a final part taking our look at some of the history of Tonner to his death not quite a decade later, so be sure to look out for that.