Volume 047-1 - January 1993 (10 pages)

the storage and care of it}? according to the Transcript of Nov. 25. A notice of motion for a new trial by the defendant was filed by Searls and Searls on Nov. 29, but was denied by the Court. The defendant then entered a motion of appeal with the California Supreme Court on March 5, 1885. According to the plaintiff, the furniture and household goods had been stored in an old dilapidated barn through which ‘‘a person could see in readily” (Transcript On Appeal, folios 433 to 437) and which was never used as a warehouse (folios 438, 439, 455). The barn was also occupied as a stable for teamsters (folio 457), with holes in it through which hogs could go in and through which boys were in the habit of going in (folios 461, 462), and not a place suitable for the storage of household goods (folios 468, 469). The structure was ‘‘about to tumble down”? (folio 558), propped up with scantling to keep it from falling over (folios 561, 562), with openings through which the plaintiff's furniture could be plainly seen (folios 573, 574), which defendant’s own testimony showed had no floor and was filled with hay (‘‘a combustible material’’) upon which the goods were stored (folios 791 to 794). Furthermore, Cross and Simonds argued that it was the defendant’s duty to have stored Hoyt’s goods in ‘‘a suitable warehouse;’ and not in a place filled with combustibles, showing ‘‘a clear case of negligence’ on the part of the defendant. Also, Mrs. Hoyt had not been notified by the NCNGRR that her household goods had been stored in the barn as required by Section 2121 of the Civil Code. Searls admitted the barn ‘‘was not a suitable place in which to store the furniture;’ but that “It would not follow that an act of negligence on the part of the defendant as a warehouseman relieved its liability as a common carrier,’’ which liability had ceased on June 7, 1882 (more than two years before the suit was brought), when Mrs. Hoyt had been notified of the arrival of her goods. Searls further stated that an instruction given by the Court “‘entirely ignores the distinction between the defendant’s liability as a common carrier and as a warehouseman, and assumes that the Statute of Limitations could only be set in motion by a demand’’ of the plaintiff for the delivery of his goods. Such an action, argued Searls, ‘“‘the whole theory of the plaintiff’s action can at once be changed and a recovery against us as a warehouseman. We do not so understand the law.’’ (Appellant’s Brief, p.9.) Searls cited the case of Jackson vs. the Sacramento Valley Railroad Company (23 Cal. 268), in which an action against a common carrier, ‘‘recovery could be had as against such defendant in its capacity as a warehouseman, fails entirely to meet the present case, for in that case the decision was placed upon the ground that the defendant had not been taken by surprise or mislead, ‘or prevented from setting up every defense they may have had to the action?’’ (Appelant’s Points and Authorities, p. 11.) On Feb. 27, 1886, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgement of the Nevada County Superior Court, stating that ‘‘we would not be justified in reversing the judgement and order merely because the complaint avers (the) defendant is liable in the capacity of ‘common carrier:”’ Both the Transcript and the Union of March 4, 1886, reported of the judgement in favor of Hoyt, and the Union stated that the amount to be paid by the railroad company ‘‘will be about $3,000:’ By today’s monetary value, furniture worth $4,000 would amount to sparce items, such as a sofa, some chairs, a bed, tables, crockery and cooking utensils, and the like. According to Mrs. Hoyt, shortly after the fire George Fletcher, Secretary of the NCNGRR, told her ‘“‘the furniture was too fine to bring into the mountains’”’ (folio 347). Mrs. Hoyt’s inventory of her goods, however, consisted of stoves, several beds, marble-topped furniture, bureaux, tables and chairs, boxes of linen, draperies and clothing, kitchen crockery, books and paintings, silverware, Chinese curios, and among many other numerous bundles of goods, a tin box, packed full, containing gold and silver specimens (folios 190-197, and 522-525). The specimens had been given to Mrs. Hoyt (nee Ella Smith) over the years by William Watt, Grass Valley’s mine owner, capitalist and financier; Bruce Lee, former Superintendent of the Empire Mine; and Elmer Sanford, a long-time local mining man. The daughter of Charles W. Smith, propietor of the Grass Valley’s Exchange Hotel (later, the Holbrooke), Miss Ella Smith may have acquired a penchant for valuable gold articles from her father who had collected a vast array of minerals and curiosities over the years and which were on display in the hotel lobby. The Union of Feb. 20, 1873, in particulr, carried a lengthy article on what the newspaper called ‘‘Charley Smith’s Cabinet?’ The collection included stalactites, fossils, a rare jaw bone and teeth of an extinct mastodon, crystallized quartz of every variety and obtained from local mines, diamonds and gems from all parts of the world, stuffed birds and petrified fishes, among many other curios. The collection, said the Union, was worth “thousands of dollars?’ A native of New York, Hoyt had come to Grass Valley sometime in the late 1860s and had settled in Boston Ravine where he had leased a house on Oct. 1, 1870, from William Rodda for a term of two years at $15 per month (Leases, Book 2, p. 8). Hoyt was a self-made mining man who soon after his arrival here found himself involved with some of Nevada County’s most influential citizens. The 1870 Census shows him as ‘‘Superintendent, Quartz Mine)’ with a personal worth placed at $15,000;’ and he was superintendent of the North Star Mine in 1871 (Nevada County Directory for 1871-72). On Sept. 25, 1869, Hoyt had acquired an interest in the Tornado quartz ledge at the head of Deadman’s Flat in Grass Valley from Nevada City banker E.M. Preston (Deeds, Book 37, p. 49); and on Feb. 6, 1870, Joyt became a partner with James Bennalleck, part owner and superintendent of the Empire Mine, in acquiring an interest in the South Star Gold Mining Company, whose mining ledge was situated “about three miles southwesterly’? from Grass Valley (Deeds, Book 37, p. 459 and 629). Other investors in the mine were Charles W. Smith and Francis Hussey from San Francisco. In 1872, the company entered onto an agreement with Timothy Le Duc, a teamster involved in hauling heavy timber and machinery to local mines and owner of the Grass Valley Brick Yard, to furnish the mine with 478 cords of wood at a cost of $1,913. In early 1873, when the company still owed him $1,142, Le Duc hired Alfred Dibble and sued Hoyt ef a/ and was awarded over $1,300 (Searls Library, Cabinet 4, Case 3735). On Aug. 1870, Hoyt acquired an interest in the Bryan Mining Company, ‘‘about two miles easterly’’ from Grass Valley (Deeds, Book 38, p. 466, 468); and on March 23, 1871, Hoyt, Bennalleck, David Watt, George Johnson, Superintendent of the Massachusetts and Eureka Mines, Charles W. Smith, and Alexander Brady of the Rocky Bar Mine, became partners in the Great Western Ledge, ‘‘about 3.5 miles southwesterly”’ from Grass Valley (Deeds, Book 37, p. 639). Hoyt purchased several other mining claims during the following years, among them the South Idaho Ledge (Mining Claims, Book 5, p. 41; Deeds, Book 39, p. 158), which he later sold to Francis Hussey (Deeds, Book 39, p. 254, 256); and the Benton Gold Mining Company on Howard Hill (Deeds, Book 61, p. 298; Mining Claims, Book 8, p. 631). Finally, on March 3, 1871, along with Alexander Brady, Charles W. Smith, banker Thomas Findley, the brothers Edward and John Coleman, lumber magnate Reuben Leech, attorneys Dibble and James Byrne, pharmacist William Loutzenheiser, William and David Watt, County Supervisor and Assessor J.J. Dorsey, mine owner Henry Scadden, and businessman Martin Ford, among others , Hoyt purchased a town lot in Block 12 of the city of Grass Valley on which the Concert Hall building was situated. Hoyt and his wife left Grass Valley in the Fall of 1875 for San Mateo and returned to Nevada County at the time of the fire of Aug. 1882. We lose track of Hoyt after that date, but we surmise that he and his wife and two children went back to the Bay Area, possibly to San Mateo, where Charles W. Smith had settled after he had defaulted on a mortgage given him be Judge Miles P. O’Connor in 1877. O’Connor then bought the Exchange Hotel in a sheriff sale and subsequently sold it to Daniel P. Holbrooke who renamed the hotel after himself. Grateful thanks are due to the following persons who helped us in the research for this article: Peter Van der Pas of the Pacific Library; Dorothy Boettner of the Nevada County Historical Library; Ed Tyson of the Searls Historical Library; and Richard Ellers, Esq. Sources Consulted: Other than those mentioned: Reports of Cases Determined in The Supreme Court of the State of California, Vol. 68, pp. 644-645, San Francisco; Bancroft-Whitney Co., 1887. Wells, Harry L., History of Nevada County, California, Oakland, California; Thompson and West, 1880.

the storage and care of it}? according to the Transcript of Nov. 25. A notice of motion for a new trial by the defendant was filed by Searls and Searls on Nov. 29, but was denied by the Court. The defendant then entered a motion of appeal with the California Supreme Court on March 5, 1885. According to the plaintiff, the furniture and household goods had been stored in an old dilapidated barn through which ‘‘a person could see in readily” (Transcript On Appeal, folios 433 to 437) and which was never used as a warehouse (folios 438, 439, 455). The barn was also occupied as a stable for teamsters (folio 457), with holes in it through which hogs could go in and through which boys were in the habit of going in (folios 461, 462), and not a place suitable for the storage of household goods (folios 468, 469). The structure was ‘‘about to tumble down”? (folio 558), propped up with scantling to keep it from falling over (folios 561, 562), with openings through which the plaintiff's furniture could be plainly seen (folios 573, 574), which defendant’s own testimony showed had no floor and was filled with hay (‘‘a combustible material’’) upon which the goods were stored (folios 791 to 794). Furthermore, Cross and Simonds argued that it was the defendant’s duty to have stored Hoyt’s goods in ‘‘a suitable warehouse;’ and not in a place filled with combustibles, showing ‘‘a clear case of negligence’ on the part of the defendant. Also, Mrs. Hoyt had not been notified by the NCNGRR that her household goods had been stored in the barn as required by Section 2121 of the Civil Code. Searls admitted the barn ‘‘was not a suitable place in which to store the furniture;’ but that “It would not follow that an act of negligence on the part of the defendant as a warehouseman relieved its liability as a common carrier,’’ which liability had ceased on June 7, 1882 (more than two years before the suit was brought), when Mrs. Hoyt had been notified of the arrival of her goods. Searls further stated that an instruction given by the Court “‘entirely ignores the distinction between the defendant’s liability as a common carrier and as a warehouseman, and assumes that the Statute of Limitations could only be set in motion by a demand’’ of the plaintiff for the delivery of his goods. Such an action, argued Searls, ‘“‘the whole theory of the plaintiff’s action can at once be changed and a recovery against us as a warehouseman. We do not so understand the law.’’ (Appellant’s Brief, p.9.) Searls cited the case of Jackson vs. the Sacramento Valley Railroad Company (23 Cal. 268), in which an action against a common carrier, ‘‘recovery could be had as against such defendant in its capacity as a warehouseman, fails entirely to meet the present case, for in that case the decision was placed upon the ground that the defendant had not been taken by surprise or mislead, ‘or prevented from setting up every defense they may have had to the action?’’ (Appelant’s Points and Authorities, p. 11.) On Feb. 27, 1886, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgement of the Nevada County Superior Court, stating that ‘‘we would not be justified in reversing the judgement and order merely because the complaint avers (the) defendant is liable in the capacity of ‘common carrier:”’ Both the Transcript and the Union of March 4, 1886, reported of the judgement in favor of Hoyt, and the Union stated that the amount to be paid by the railroad company ‘‘will be about $3,000:’ By today’s monetary value, furniture worth $4,000 would amount to sparce items, such as a sofa, some chairs, a bed, tables, crockery and cooking utensils, and the like. According to Mrs. Hoyt, shortly after the fire George Fletcher, Secretary of the NCNGRR, told her ‘“‘the furniture was too fine to bring into the mountains’”’ (folio 347). Mrs. Hoyt’s inventory of her goods, however, consisted of stoves, several beds, marble-topped furniture, bureaux, tables and chairs, boxes of linen, draperies and clothing, kitchen crockery, books and paintings, silverware, Chinese curios, and among many other numerous bundles of goods, a tin box, packed full, containing gold and silver specimens (folios 190-197, and 522-525). The specimens had been given to Mrs. Hoyt (nee Ella Smith) over the years by William Watt, Grass Valley’s mine owner, capitalist and financier; Bruce Lee, former Superintendent of the Empire Mine; and Elmer Sanford, a long-time local mining man. The daughter of Charles W. Smith, propietor of the Grass Valley’s Exchange Hotel (later, the Holbrooke), Miss Ella Smith may have acquired a penchant for valuable gold articles from her father who had collected a vast array of minerals and curiosities over the years and which were on

display in the hotel lobby. The Union of Feb. 20, 1873, in particulr, carried a lengthy article on what the newspaper called ‘‘Charley Smith’s Cabinet?’ The collection included stalactites, fossils, a rare jaw bone and teeth of an extinct mastodon, crystallized quartz of every variety and obtained from local mines, diamonds and gems from all parts of the world, stuffed birds and petrified fishes, among many other curios. The collection, said the Union, was worth “thousands of dollars?’ A native of New York, Hoyt had come to Grass Valley sometime in the late 1860s and had settled in Boston Ravine where he had leased a house on Oct. 1, 1870, from William Rodda for a term of two years at $15 per month (Leases, Book 2, p. 8). Hoyt was a self-made mining man who soon after his arrival here found himself involved with some of Nevada County’s most influential citizens. The 1870 Census shows him as ‘‘Superintendent, Quartz Mine)’ with a personal worth placed at $15,000;’ and he was superintendent of the North Star Mine in 1871 (Nevada County Directory for 1871-72). On Sept. 25, 1869, Hoyt had acquired an interest in the Tornado quartz ledge at the head of Deadman’s Flat in Grass Valley from Nevada City banker E.M. Preston (Deeds, Book 37, p. 49); and on Feb. 6, 1870, Joyt became a partner with James Bennalleck, part owner and superintendent of the Empire Mine, in acquiring an interest in the South Star Gold Mining Company, whose mining ledge was situated “about three miles southwesterly’? from Grass Valley (Deeds, Book 37, p. 459 and 629). Other investors in the mine were Charles W. Smith and Francis Hussey from San Francisco. In 1872, the company entered onto an agreement with Timothy Le Duc, a teamster involved in hauling heavy timber and machinery to local mines and owner of the Grass Valley Brick Yard, to furnish the mine with 478 cords of wood at a cost of $1,913. In early 1873, when the company still owed him $1,142, Le Duc hired Alfred Dibble and sued Hoyt ef a/ and was awarded over $1,300 (Searls Library, Cabinet 4, Case 3735). On Aug. 1870, Hoyt acquired an interest in the Bryan Mining Company, ‘‘about two miles easterly’’ from Grass Valley (Deeds, Book 38, p. 466, 468); and on March 23, 1871, Hoyt, Bennalleck, David Watt, George Johnson, Superintendent of the Massachusetts and Eureka Mines, Charles W. Smith, and Alexander Brady of the Rocky Bar Mine, became partners in the Great Western Ledge, ‘‘about 3.5 miles southwesterly”’ from Grass Valley (Deeds, Book 37, p. 639). Hoyt purchased several other mining claims during the following years, among them the South Idaho Ledge (Mining Claims, Book 5, p. 41; Deeds, Book 39, p. 158), which he later sold to Francis Hussey (Deeds, Book 39, p. 254, 256); and the Benton Gold Mining Company on Howard Hill (Deeds, Book 61, p. 298; Mining Claims, Book 8, p. 631). Finally, on March 3, 1871, along with Alexander Brady, Charles W. Smith, banker Thomas Findley, the brothers Edward and John Coleman, lumber magnate Reuben Leech, attorneys Dibble and James Byrne, pharmacist William Loutzenheiser, William and David Watt, County Supervisor and Assessor J.J. Dorsey, mine owner Henry Scadden, and businessman Martin Ford, among others , Hoyt purchased a town lot in Block 12 of the city of Grass Valley on which the Concert Hall building was situated. Hoyt and his wife left Grass Valley in the Fall of 1875 for San Mateo and returned to Nevada County at the time of the fire of Aug. 1882. We lose track of Hoyt after that date, but we surmise that he and his wife and two children went back to the Bay Area, possibly to San Mateo, where Charles W. Smith had settled after he had defaulted on a mortgage given him be Judge Miles P. O’Connor in 1877. O’Connor then bought the Exchange Hotel in a sheriff sale and subsequently sold it to Daniel P. Holbrooke who renamed the hotel after himself. Grateful thanks are due to the following persons who helped us in the research for this article: Peter Van der Pas of the Pacific Library; Dorothy Boettner of the Nevada County Historical Library; Ed Tyson of the Searls Historical Library; and Richard Ellers, Esq. Sources Consulted: Other than those mentioned: Reports of Cases Determined in The Supreme Court of the State of California, Vol. 68, pp. 644-645, San Francisco; Bancroft-Whitney Co., 1887. Wells, Harry L., History of Nevada County, California, Oakland, California; Thompson and West, 1880.