The history of Ezra Meeker published by the Puyallup Historical Society at Meeker Mansion and Wikipedia editor Gary Greenbaum, is a history that is nothing short of false, inaccurate, and misleading.  An overwhelming amount of well documented historical evidence contradicts their version of Ezra Meeker’s life history and portray him as he truly was; as a liar and a thief, who bribed, bullied, and intimidated others for his own benefit.

The Walker Place and the theft of John Morgan’s property are two of those events.

Ezra Meeker was a neighbor and trusted friend of John and Mary Walker in 1869.  John and Mary lived on what was known at the time as the Walker Place, land they purchased years earlier from Adam Benston and Willis Boatman.  Located just across the Puyallup River from Ezra Meeker’s homestead claim, the Walker Place sat on top of some of the most fertile soil in the Puyallup Valley.

In December 1869 John Walker died.  With no family living close by, Margaret Walker and their eleven year old daughter, Mary Walker, moved back to New Jersey, and then later to New York.  A few years later in June 1876, Margaret Walker died, leaving the estate to her daughter Mary Walker, who was nineteen at the time.

In April 1879, three years after Margaret died, Ezra Meeker took out letters of administration for the estate in Pierce County, Washington Territory. Meeker was appointed and qualified as the administrator on April 26, 1879, and remained in that capacity until July 1880. Neither the estate of John Walker or Mary Walker had any debts, so it was unclear at the time why the estate would need an administrator.

In March of 1880, while acting as administrator of the estate, Ezra Meeker informed Mary Walker in a letter that the former occupants of the property were in arrears of rent, and that he had taken possession of the property. In the letter Ezra Meeker told her that the property was of little value and it would be difficult to rent, but he would pay two hundred dollars per annum rent for three years. Included with the letter was a lease agreement with those terms for her to approve and sign.

Mary Walker had no knowledge or means of knowledge of the condition or value of the Walker Place, or its rental value. She was just eleven years old when she and her mother moved to New Jersey, and never returned to Washington Territory. She had full trust and confidence in Ezra Meeker, as did her parents when they were alive, and depended on him for information and guidance in matters regarding the property. Meeker was, after all, her father’s trusted friend and the administrator of the estate.

Mary agreed to the lease agreement and on March 1, 1880, signed and returned a copy to Ezra Meeker. Then, in October of 1881, with more than a year still remaining on the original lease, Meeker secured an extension from Mary Walker, extending the lease through March 1, 1886.

Fraud and Deceit

One month after Mary Walker signed the lease extension with Meeker, she was contacted by Augustus Gardella of Pierce County in Washington Territory, enquiring if she would be interested in selling the Walker place. It was then that Mary discovered Ezra Meeker had been deceiving her, concealing and misrepresenting the true value of the property. The Walker place, as it turned out, was very valuable, and Ezra Meeker was making a fortune from the hops he had been growing on the Walker Place, nearly $10.6 million worth in todays money.

Upon learning of the fraud and deceit made by Ezra Meeker, Mary demanded the cancellation of the lease and the extension, but Ezra Meeker refused. She went so far as to bring an action in New York against Ezra Meeker to revoke the leases, which the court granted, but stil, Ezra Meeker refused.

With no other recourse, Mary Walker conveyed by warranty deed, the land to Augustus Gardella on November 29, 1882, for $5,000.00. Gardella then sold an undivided half of the Walker place on August 4, 1883 to William Wagner and F. A. Farquharson, who then leased a portion of the property to John D. Morgan.

Gardella, Wagner, and Farquharson gave notice to Ezra Meeker they held title to the Walker place and had leased a portion of it to John D. Moran.  Meeker was told to vacate the property immediately. But as he had done with Mary Walker, Ezra Meeker refused. Gardella, Wagner, and Farquharson filed an action against Ezra Meeker the second week of August 1883 in District Court at Puyallup to take possession of the Walker place.

John D. Morgan

On the 16th of August 1883, John D. Morgan purchased lumber and other building materials and began building on the portion of the Walker place he had leased from Gardella. Ezra Meeker showed up and demanded that Morgan leave the property, informing Morgan that he was the owner of the property. After a heated discussion, Morgan refused and Ezra Meeker left.

Morgan continued working and after a few more hours also left, leaving the building materials at the site. When Morgan returned a few days later on August 19th, the building materials were gone, including the building materials he used to build a fence and the beginnings of a hops house. Morgan reported the missing building materials to the sheriff and to Gardella.

The trial for the action brought against Ezra Meeker by A. Gardella, William Wagner, and A. S. Farquharson to recover possession of the Walker place began in Puyallup on August 21, 1883, with Judge James Knox presiding.  Evidence submitted to the court included letters of administration taken out by Ezra Meeker,  letters Mary Walker received from Ezra Meeker describing the condition of the property and its value, the offer to rent the property from with the lease agreements sent for her to sign, letters Mary Walker sent to Ezra Meeker revoking the lease and extension, copies of the decree and judgement from the New York court, and the warranty deed which Mary Walker conveyed to A. Gardella for the Walker place.

On the 22nd of August, Ezra Meeker took the stand to testify in his defense.  It was during Ezra Meeker’s testimony that John Morgan, who was present that day, heard Ezra Meeker testify that the building materials belonging to him were taken away by his order.  Upon hearing Meeker’s testimony, Morgan reported it to the sheriff.

After examining all the evidence and hearing testimony from the witnesses, Judge Knox ruled in favor of A. Gardella, William Wagner, and A. S. Farquharson.  Judge Knox stated Ezra Meeker took out letters of administration for the sole purpose of collecting rent and recovering possession of the Walker place for himself.  That the estate of the father nor the mother was in debt and that administration of the estate was therefore unnecessary, if not illegal.

While acting as the pretended trustee, Ezra Meeker obtained the first lease from Mary Walker by means of deception and fraud, and the extension of the lease was done by the same means.   The lease and its extension was therefor void at all times and that A. Gardella, William Wagner, and A. S. Farquharson had the right to recover possession of the Walker place, with costs. Ezra Meeker, however, still refused, and appealed Judge Knox’s decision.

Territory of Washington v. Ezra Meeker

Meanwhile, the investigation of the theft of the building materials belonging to John Morgan continued.  After interviewing several witnesses who were present at the time the building materials were taken, the prosecutor presented its evidence to the court.  On September 25, 1883 a warrant was issued by Judge James Knox for the arrest of Ezra Meeker, Robert Wilson, F. M. Slythe, and Frank Meeker, who were promptly arrested and brought before Judge Knox to answer to the charges.

Frank Meeker, who was a co-defendant and attorney for the defendants, immediately filed a motion stating it was their belief they would not receive a fair trial in Puyallup with Judge Knox as the presiding judge. On September 26, 1883, Judge Knox ruled in favor of the motion for change of venue and sent the matter to Judge Alex Campbell in New Tacoma, the nearest court holding trials in Pierce County.

Later that afternoon, Ezra Meeker, Frank, Meeker, Robert Wilson, and F. M. Slythe appeared before Judge Campbell who adjourned court until September 27th 1883, at ten o’clock

The following morning, September 27, 1883 the parties appeared in court and a motion was made by Frank Meeker that the complaint be dismissed on the ground that the cause does not allege any offense. Judge Campbell denied the motion.

Morgan testified that he had leased a portion of the Walker place known as the “race track” from A. Gardella, William Wagner, and A. S. Farquharson in August of 1883 . That he purchased building materials and brought them to the site to build a barn. The building materials brought to the site included one thousand shakes and clapboards, twelve poles from ten to fifteen feet in length, twenty poles intended for rafters twelve feet in length, nine plates at twenty feet in length.

Morgan stated that on the 16th of August he arrived at the site with the materials and began work when Ezra Meeker showed up. Morgan stated that Meeker said to him that he had heard he had a lease of the Walker place and had taken possession. Morgan stated he told Meeker yes he did have a lease on the place and had indeed taken possession. Meeker warned Morgan to stay off of the property and then left. Morgan told the court that he continued working and after a few more hours he too left, leaving the building materials at the site.

Morgan stated that when he returned on the 19th of August the building materials were missing, including the materials for the work he had completed on the 16th. He then reported the missing building materials to the sheriff and to A. Gardella. Morgan told the court that on August 22, 1883, while attending the trial of A. Gardella v. Ezra Meeker in Puyallup, he heard Ezra Meeker testify that the building materials were taken away by his orders.  Morgan told the court he the told the sheriff what Meeker had said.

C. R. King, a witness for the prosecution told the court he was present when the poles and shakes were removed, at 3 o’clock in the morning before daylight. He stated Mr. Slythe ordered him to go there. When he arrived at the Walker place Mr. Slythe was present as was Mr. Wilson, Mr. Frank Meeker, and Mr. Simons. Mr. Slythe, he told the court, was Ezra Meeker’s foreman at the time and that Mr. Frank Meeker gave orders after we got there.

During cross-examination by Frank Meeker, King stated he did not think he was stealing poles when he was over there. He told the court he thought at the time they belonged to Mr. Meeker.  Don’t know whether I was stealing or not was acting by your orders, he said. (Meaning Mr. Frank Meeker). It was not day light when we went there. Was in Mr. Meeker’s employ at that time. Have been since discharged. Did not swear I would make a damned lot from Mr. Meeker. I wanted more money for all the extra work.

The prosecution called W. T. Simmons to testify.  After being sworn in Simmons told the court he was present when this stuff was taken from place. They were taken to Mr. Meeker’s hop house or near there between the hotel and gate of Mr. Meeker’s barn lot. It was close to one mile from where they took the boards to where they left them. Mr. Frank Meeker gave orders after we got over to where material was on the ground. Mr. Simmons, Mr. Frank Meeker, Mr. King, and Mr. Slythe were present.

The prosecution called William Wagner to the stand. Mr. Wagner testified that he was one of the owners of the Walker place. His partners A. Gardella and Farquharson authorized Morgan to take possession of the portion of the Walker place known as the racetrack. Wagner told the court he had previously given notice to Ezra Meeker that he and his partners had title to the Walker place and for Meeker to vacate the property immediately but that he refused.  Wagner told the court when Meeker refused to leave they took out an action against him in District Court in Puyallup.  Wagner also told the court that when Morgan told him of the missing building materials he confronted Meeker, who wouldn’t answer him.

The defense called Ezra Meeker to the stand.  After being sworn in Meeker told the court “I am the owner of the Walker place. I hold a written lease of the Walker place from Mary Walker. I held it one year on a verbal lease then for two years under a written lease and then under an extension of the original lease. My possession has been recognized by Mary Walker.  I heard that Mr. Morgan had leased the portion of the Walker place known as the race track. I went to him and warned him that I would not allow anyone to trespass on my property. I took counsel with Mr. Haught and Henry, they advised me to forcedly repel any attempt to occupy that place. Upon my return I was informed attempts were being made to occupy the premises and a fence was being built. I went to the track and informed Mr. Morgan and other gentleman. Upon my return from Seattle I found property had been removed according to my orders. Shakes were taken to Puyallup and dumped. Poles dumped in road. Shakes still there.”

The prosecuting attorney, Mr. Judson asked Ezra Meeker “Usual to see shakes piled up in the streets of Puyallup?” Meeker replied “Shakes not marked. They are in the street adjoining my premises.”

Meeker admitted during cross examination that Mary Walker had asked to cancel the lease in March 1883, and that a suit was pending in New York for ten thousand dollars.

F. M. Slythe testified he knew Ezra Meeker was in possession of the Walker place, that he exercised ownership by cultivation of property (growing the hops). I was ordered to remove stuff from ground at 3 o’clock a.m. Didn’t get out till 4 a.m. Loaded up poles and unloaded them on road. Shakes hauled to Puyallup and dumped on the street.

Ezra Meeker was recalled to the stand by the defense to make a diagram of the property.   Meeker testified he had put out 142 acres of hops and built a barn on the property and was considering building another barn.  Under cross examination Meeker told the court the hops were put out 2 years ago (meaning 1881) and the barn was built in 1881.

Neither Frank Meeker nor the other co-defendant, Robert Wilson testified.

After the prosecution rested its case, Frank Meeker moved to dismiss on the grounds no offense had been proven.
The motion was overruled by Judge Campbell.

On the afternoon of September 27, 1883 Judge Alex Campbell rendered his decision

The court after duly considering the evidence orders and adjudges that Frank Meeker, Robert Wilson, and F. N. Slythe, be discharged, there being no probable cause that the said defendants are guilty as charged. And the court further orders and adjudges that there is probable cause that the said Ezra Meeker is guilty of the said offense as charged, and that he be held to bail in his own recognizance in the sum of one hundred dollars to answer to the said charge at the next term of the District Court of the third judicial district of Washington Territory holding trials at New Tacoma in Pierce County.

-Alex Campbell, Justice of the Peace

After posting bail in the amount of $100.00, Ezra Meeker was released and given a trial date for November 20, 1883.

Territory of Washington v. Ezra Meeker

Ezra Meeker’s trial charging him with theft of the building materials belonging to John D. Morgan began on November 20, 1883.  Prosecuting attorney Charles M. Bradshaw introduced a motion to the court to dismiss the charges against Ezra Meeker based on the following:

  1. Because said complaint does not allege the taking of the property therein described was a felonious act
  2. Because none of the witnesses for the prosecution were recognized by the committing magistrate to appear at this court, and none of them are in attendance except Mr. Wagoner whose testimony is not material
  3. Because the prosecuting witness John D. Morgan has abandoned the case and left the jurisdiction of the court
  4. Because the circumstances disclosed by the evidence taken on file herein show that the acts committed by the defendant were done under a claim of possession to certain real property, and for the purpose of preventing the complaining witness from effecting an entry into and upon said property, and at most was a trespass
  5. Because any further expense in prosecuting said cause must and in furtherance burdening Pierce County with costs, and subserve no purpose

On November 20, 1883, the motion was granted and the case against Ezra Meeker was dismissed.

John D. Morgan had invested a lot of time and money to start what would have been a very profitable venture growing hops on the Walker Place, and everything he had was stolen by Ezra Meeker.  Why would he just suddenly up and leave the territory?  Was he threatened, intimidated, or was he bribed by someone?  We will never know the answer to those questions because John D. Morgan was never to be seen or heard from again.

Meeker’s Appeal of the Gardella Judgement

Four years have past and it is now February 4, 1887.  The Supreme Court for the Territory of Washington handed down its decision on the appeal of Ezra Meeker for the judgement against him regarding possession of the Walker place given by Judge James Knox in Puyallup.

Mr. Justice Langford delivered the opinion of the court, and didn’t hold back.

The defendant, Ezra Meeker, was neighbor and friend of one John Walker and his wife Margaret in 1869, when Walker died.  Mary I. Walker, the grantor and lessor, was the a child of eleven years, the daughter of John and Margaret Walker.  The mother with her said daughter left the territory and migrated to New Jersey, and afterwards to New York.

In June 1876, the mother died.  Neither the estate of the husband nor wife was in debt.  Yet on the 26th of April, 1879, Ezra Meeker took out letters of administration for the sole purpose of collecting rent and recovering possession of the land in question.

While acting as such administrator, on March 1, 1880, he procured from the sole heir, Mary I, his first lease, which he claims was the beginning of his term, by virtue of which he now claims to hold.  After he was thus in possession for three years, and when that lease still had a year to run, on October 1, 1880, he procured his second lease of extension, which, if not terminated by the revocation of Mary I., is the title by which he now claims.

In January, 1883, Mary I. did what she could to revoke the leases and terminate the term.  She went so far as to bring an action for that purpose in New York.  Defendant still held against her will, but she accepted a small amount rent from afterwards.

Not succeeding in gaining possession, Mary I., on the twenty-ninth day of November, 1883, by deed conveyed to one of the plaintiffs this land, warranting against all encumbrances.  The grantee, having taken possession of part the land thus conveyed to him, gave notice to the defendant of his title, and notice to the defendant to surrender the part of the premises that he occupied.  The defendant refusing, an action was brought; a jury appears to have been waived by consent of the parties that the case should be tried upon the equity side of the court.  After the pleadings were perfected and the evidence was taken, and the cause duly submitted, the court found its conclusion of fact and law, and entered a judgement and decree for the plaintiffs for possession and accounting for rent.

The evidence, after being carefully examined, appears to warrant all the conclusions of fact found.  These facts are sufficient to sustain the judgement.  Were this not so, there is a defect to the defendant’s right, which is shown by the evidence.

While it is admitted that there were no debts owing by the estate, yet letters of administration were taken out by the defendant.  This ipso facto made him trustee for the heir, or at least he is estopped from denying he was such.  Indeed, there being no creditors of the estate, administration and the expense thereof was unnecessary, if not illegal.

While thus trustee of Mary I., he procured the first lease from her.  The defendant after this procured what is called the extension of the lease.  It is claimed that this was an act done after the trust relation had ceased.  When it is considered he had been trustee of father, mother, and administrator of both father and mother, and that Mary I. had known him as such and as a friend of the family, and they and she had put their trust in him, and he had by virtue of that trust possession of the property, and that Mary I. was all the time a long distance from the property, and could of had no personal knowledge of her rights; that there was a constant correspondence between the defendant and her, and no proof that she had any other agent,—this continued the relationship of trust and confidence until after the pretended extension.

Without doubt it was from the defendant’s advice that both the lease and extension were executed.  He sent them to her to have her execute them.  This would place the defendant as an adverse party while he was trustee.  The law will not permit a trustee to place himself thus in antagonism of his duty, or permit a man thus trusted to do wrong.

A contract made between parties thus situated is void, because contrary to public policy, in the absence of all fraud, at the mere will and option of the beneficiary.  Were it void only upon the ground of fraud, yet such fraud will be presumed in the absence of all evidence.  The proof of good faith and absence of fraud would have to be proven by the strongest evidence, before such a presumption would be rebutted.  The defendant has failed to produce this evidence.

Then Mary I. could at any time, by the mere exercise of her will, avoid and annul the term and the leases.  She did this before the conveyance to plaintiff, and she did it by the terms of her conveyance to plaintiff.  This exercise of her will having terminated all rights of defendant to possession, the admitted title of the plaintiffs gives the the right to recover.

We find no error in the proceedings and judgement of the District Court, and the judgement should be affirmed with costs, and it so ordered.

Greene, C. J. and Turner, J. concurred

The Conniving Ezra Meeker

By 1887, Ezra Meeker had become one of the wealthiest men in Washington Territory, making a fortune growing in the Puyallup Valley and then selling those hops to breweries around the world.  Much of Meeker’s wealth came from the hops he grew on the Walker place, land he obtained illegally from a nineteen year old girl by deceiving her and abusing the trust she and her family had given him.

Ezra Meeker testified he had planted 142 acres of hops on the Walker place in 1881.  In his book Hop Culture in the United States, published in 1883, Meeker wrote that a typical hop grower can expect to yield up to 2,000 pounds of hops per acre when baled.  Meeker also wrote

“The high value of the hops prevailing for the past four years, culminating in the unprecedented price of one dollar per pound for the crop of 1882, has naturally attracted a wide-spread interest”

Ezra Meeker, Hop Culture in the United States, A Practical Treatise on Hop Growing in Washington Territory, E. Meeker & Co., Puyallup, Washington Territory, 1883, p. 3;

All total Ezra Meeker made over $10.6 million from the hops he grew on the land he obtained illegally by fraud and deceit.  Mary Walker received $410.00 total in rent from Ezra Meeker.

The testimony of F. M. Slythe, W. T. Simmons, C. R. King, John D. Morgan, and William Wagoner, if nothing else, exposed Ezra Meeker for what he was; a liar, and a thief, who bullied and intimidated John D. Morgan to keep possession of the Walker which he had no right to.

Ezra Meeker sent his men out in the middle of the night, at three o’clock in the morning no less, to take property from John Morgan and dump it in the middle of the streets of Puyallup.

The Puyallup Historical Society at Meeker Mansion and Wikipedia editor Gary Greenbaum published the following about Ezra Meeker

During those years, Mr. Meeker became a dynamic force in the community, and had a part in almost everything that happened in the valley. Restless, forceful, a natural leader, he became a prime mover, galvanizing the citizens of Puyallup into action on such vital problems as the building of streets, roads, homes, schools, and businesses and transforming the forest into one of the most progressive small communities in the state. If he was not leading an undertaking, he was sure to be a busy member of some committee working on it.

−Puyallup Historical Society at Meeker Mansion, https://www.meekermansion.org/our-story-1

The facts from the evidence disagrees,  Ezra Meeker was a liar, and a thief, who bribed, bullied, and intimidated others for his own benefit.

Citations

  1. Meeker v. Gardella, 1 Wash. 139, 23 Pac. 837
  2. Territory of Washington Plaintiff, Ezra M. Meeker Defendant, Case Number: PRC-444, Case Type: Criminal, Cause: Larceny, Year: 1883
  3. Ezra Meeker, Hop Culture in the United States, A Practical Treatise on Hop Growing in Washington Territory, E. Meeker & Co., Puyallup, Washington Territory, 1883, p. 3
  4. Bureau of Land Management, Walker, John, Accession Nr: WAOAA 078391, Document Type: Serial Patent, State: Washington, Issue Date: 5/6/1882
  5. Puyallup Historical Society at Meeker Mansion, Ezra and Eliza Jane Meeker, https://www.meekermansion.org/our-story-1