of
them a town lot. It happened that these lots were being then distributed
among the residents of the town. Upon the petition of James F. Reed,
a grant was made to George Donner of one hundred vara lot number
thirty-nine, and the adjoining lot, number thirty-eight, was granted to
Mary. The price of each lot was thirty-two dollars, and both were paid
for out of the fund. The grants were both entered of record by the
Alcalde, George Hyde. The grant made to George was signed by the
Alcalde, but that made to Mary was, through inadvertence, not signed. A
successor of Hyde, as Alcalde, regranted the lot of Mary Donner to one
Ward, who discovered the omission of the Alcalde's name to her grant.
This omission caused her to lose the lot. In 1851, a number of persons
squatted on the lot of George Donner, and in 1854 brought suit against
him in the United States Circuit Court to quiet their title. This suit
was subsequently abandoned under the belief that George Donner was dead.
In 1856, a suit was instituted by George Donner, through his guardian,
to recover possession of the lot. Down to the spring of 1860, but little
progress had been made toward recovering the possession of the lot from
the squatters. The attorneys who had thus far conducted the litigation
on behalf of George Donner, were greatly embarrassed because of their
inability to fully prove the delivery of the grant to him, or to some
one for him, the courts of the State having, from the first, litigation
concerning similar grants, laid down and adhered to the rule that such
grants did not take effect unless the original grant was delivered to
the grantee. Such proof was therefore deemed indispensable.

After such proofs upon this point as were accessible had been made,
the proceedings had ceased, and for several months there had been no
prospect of any further progress being made. During this time, one
Yonti, who had undertaken to recover possession of the lot at his own
expense for a share of it, had the management of the case, and had
employed an attorney to conduct the litigation. Yontz became unable,
pecuniarily, to proceed further with the case, and informed Donner
of the fact, whereupon the latter induced his brother-in-law, S. O.
Houghton, to attempt to prosecute his claim to some final result. Mr.
Houghton applied to the court to be substituted as attorney in the case,
but resistance was made by the attorney of Yontz, and the application
was denied. Houghto