These defendants further allege, that the plaintiff Beatrice Mechlin wrongfully, unlawfully, fraudulently and maliciously, and for the purpose of cheating and defrauding the aforesaid innocent purchasers, Peter Roper and John Gasbang, out of their rights in said property, entered into a fraudulent conspiracy with one Josefa Alamar and one Gabriel Alamar, wherein it was agreed by and between them that said Josefa Alamar, as executrix of the estate of Mariano Alamar, and purporting to carry out the wishes and instructions of her deceased husband, the said Mariano Alamar, would execute a deed of sale or a confirmatory deed of said property.
And these defendants aver, that in pursuance of the fraudulent conspiracy aforesaid, the said Josefa did execute a fraudulent deed of sale to the said Beatrice Mechlin, for the purpose of cheating and defrauding these innocent purchasers, etc.
This string of prevarications ran on for about twenty pages more, repeating, ad nauseam, the same falsehoods with all legal alliteration and more than legal license.
Gabriel was left to attend this suit and other matters, and with grief, which was too profound for description and too heart-rending almost for human endurance, the two loving families separated.
Elvira must leave her beloved mother in her sad bereavement; Lizzie must see hers go to perform the painful duty of accompanying the remains of a beloved husband.
In sorrow and silent tears the Alamar family returned to their country house the day after the Mechlins left.
Mrs. Mechlin's suit in ejectment against the “innocent purchasers,” Peter and John, was, as a matter of course, decided in favor of these innocents of Judge Gryllus Lawlack. The Judge knew, as well as any one else, that the allegations of these men were brazen falsehoods strung together for the purpose of robbery. Nevertheless, his Honor Lawlack made his rulings, and set down his findings, all to suit the robbers. Among the findings that his Honor had the hardihood to write down, were these: That “James Mechlin had never possessed the premises in question; had never lived there in person or by proxy, and had never made any improvements, etc.” And these premeditated falsehoods went to the Supreme Court. The case was, of course, reversed and remanded for new trial, but with additional misstatements it was again decided by Judge Lawlack in favor of his friends. Thus, in fact, the Supreme Court was reversed by Judge Gryllus Lawlack. The case was the second time remanded by the Supreme Court, but in a new trial it was again decided in favor of Peter and John. This being the same as “reversing the Supreme Court,” but Lawlack laughs at this, saying that the Supreme Court decides according to their opinions, and he (Lawlack) does the same.
As for Peter Roper, he made no concealment of there being a private bargain between himself and Judge Gryllus Lawlack. Peter to render political or other services, Gryllus to reward them with judicial ones.
At a political meeting a friend of Roper (a lawyer in the pay of the monopoly), urged him to make a speech in favor of the railroad. Peter declined, saying that as Gryllus Lawlack wanted to run again for the Judgeship, and knew how anti-monopolist San Diego County was, it would hurt the Judge politically to have him (Peter Roper) speak for the monopoly, as everybody knew that he (Peter) was the principal support of the Judge, and exponent of his principles.
“And,” concluded Peter, “if I speak for the monopoly the Judge will grant a rehearing in a suit I am opposing, and will not decide my case as I want. That is understood between us.”