The prosecution thought they had a strong case. Lemuel had confessed the crime to an amateur detective named O.M. Clement, who went undercover among the teenagers of La Cañada. Clement told the young people that his name was “Tony.”
Young Lemuel was called to the stand. He had remained in the house all during the evening on the night the schoolhouse was burned, and knew nothing about the fire until the alarm was given. He did not deny that he had told Tony some stories, but this he did merely to show that he had the requisite amount of courage that the former had declared a necessary requirement to all who might become associated in his remunerative enterprises.
Not too shabby. Lemuel’s parents were in the courtroom. His twin brother had provided an alibi. Witnesses had testified to his good character.
And then, the coup de gras. Just before the evening recess, La Cañada attorney Will Gould presented evidence that “on the day previous to the fire” there were “several Chinamen who worked in the neighborhood.”
The next day, Gould argued to the jury. His theory was that “the Chinese, out of spite at being importuned for tax money, set fire to the schoolhouse, and then went away...”
The district attorney was caught unawares. In 1893, one could never underestimate the value of racial prejudice. The argument had the predicted effect. After considerable deliberations, the jury was unable to reach a verdict.
It was a “hung jury.”
On July 25, 1893, the district attorney dismissed the case.
ANITA SUSAN BRENNER is a longtime La Cañada Flintridge resident. E-mail her at anitasusan.brenner @yahoo.com.
