Embedded Files
Indictment
Indictment
State of California
County of San Joaquin
The People of the State of California against Isaac C Glenn in the Court of Sessions in the County of San Joaquin. February Term AD 1858
Isaac C Glenn is accused by the Grand Juy of the County of San Joaquin by this indictment of the crime of Murder committed as follows:
The said Isaac C. Glenn on the 25th day of January AD 1858, at the County of San Joaquin, with force and arms in and upon the body of one Francis Brubaker in the peace of the People of the State of California then and there being, feloniously, wilfully, unlawfully and of his malice aforethought, did make an assault and the said Isaac C. Glenn a certain pistol called a revolver, then and there charged with gun powder and leaden bullet, which said pistol, he, the said Isaac C. Glenn in his right hand then and there had and held, then and there feloniously, wilfully unlawfully, and of his malice aforethought did discharge and shoot off, to, at, against and upon the said Francis Brubaker, and the said Isaac C. Glenn with the leaden bullet aforesaid out of the pistol aforesaid, then and there by force of the gunpowder aforesaid by the said Isaac C. Glenn discharged and shot off as aforesaid, then and there feloniously, unlawfully, willfully and of his malice aforethought did strike penetrate and wound him the said Francis Brubaker in and upon the right side of the back just below the point of the right should blade, of him, the said Francis Brubaker, giving to him the said Francis Brubaker, then and there, with the leaden bullet aforesaid so as aforesaid discharged and shot out of the pistol aforesaid, by the said Isaac C. Glenn, in and upon the right side of the back just below the point of the right should blade of him the said Francis Brubaker, one mortal wound of the depth of six inches and of the breadth of half an inch, of which said mortal wound the said Francis Brubaker from the said 25th of January 1858 until the 7th day of February in the same year, in the County aforesaid, did languish and languishing did live; on which said 7th day February 1858 at the County aforesaid of the said mortal wound, he the said Francis Brubaker died.
And so the Grand Jury aforesaid on their oaths do say, the the said Isaac C. Glenn him the said Francis Brubaker in the manner and by the means aforesaid, feloniously, willfully, unlawfully, and of his malice aforethough, did kill and murder, contrary to the statue in such cases made and provided; and contrary to the peace and dignity of the people of the State of California
T.T. Bouldin
Dist. Atty
Names of witnesses sworn and examined before the Grand Jury:
James Urin (James Uren)
Fred Copsey
John McCausland
Andrew Vanvaleer
Benj P Barney
Dr. Thomas Kendall
Allbert Glines
William Clifford
Henry Wilson
Dr. Cowan
Phiilip Sovereign
Jeremiah Gooch
Job Grant
Wash. Train
GlennIndictment.pdfBrubaker's version of events
Brubaker's version of events
Per his "Dying Declaration", as recorded by John McCausland, Justice of the Peace
State of California, Count of San Joaquin
Deposition and Statement of Francis Bruebaker taken in extremis on the 28th day of January A.D. 1858. On Monday the 25th day of January 1858 I.C. Glen came to me and my brother Robert Bruebaker in the field south of this house We started towards the house and James Uren joined us as we went to the house I.C. Glen then said he was going to put our things out of the house he asked me if I had the key and I told him I had well he said he wanted me to unlock the door the door and I did so he then made a remark like this, stand back, Well I did not understand what he meant by the remark I then stepped into the house and as soon as I stepped into the house he shot me and I fell to the ground about that time my brother Robert Brebaker interfered and the fight lasted between them Glen and my brother Robert Bruebaker about two or three minutes probably Jim Uren was in with it I could not tell I thought he shot my brother I could not tell I seen Glen shoot my brother the two last shots he received. I seen him fall I then commenced crawling to the back part of the house from the door just as I got my pistol Glen came back to the door and fired at me again Well we fired a round or two I do not know of more that two shots apiece being shot I am shore Glen shot twice at me I am not shore that I shot more than once I might have shot twice I was much excited and hurt he then run and that was the last I heard of him: When the last shots was short at my brother Robert Bruebaker I seen him fall Glen shot those two shots he then left him and come to me and shot at me this the time above referred to.
Francis (his X mark) Bruebaker
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28th day of January AD 1858
John McCausland Justice of the Peace
FBrubakerDyingDeclaration.pdfGlenn's version of events
Glenn's version of events
Per his Notice of Appeal, as prepared by his counsel, Calhoun Benham:
And afterward to wit, on the same day, the following Statement was filed.
District Court 5th Judicial District
Count of San Joaquin, State of California
The People of the State of California
vs.
Isaac C. Glenn
The defendant in the above entitled cause being on his trial for the murder of one Frank Brubaker, it appeared by the testimony that on 25th of January A.D. 1858, one Robert Brubaker and the aforesaid Frank were shot by the defendant and afterwards died of the wounds then inflicted by the said defendant, Robert Brubaker instantly and Frank Brubaker some fourteen days later: that the two deceased were shot by the defendant at the same time, that is to say within the space of a few minutes. It was sworn by one of the witnesses James Uren who was present at the homicide that the deceased and the defendant approached the house occupied by the deceased, that the deceased Frank Brubaker opened the door, and rushed in, that thereupon the defendant cried out "Stop" to which the deceased Frank replied"I'll damn soon stop you"; that a firing with pistols thereupon was begun by and between Frank Brubaker and the defendant: that he the witness Uren did not know which shot first: that a moment after the defendant fired at Frank Robert Brubaker jumped forward and grabbed the pistol of the defendant with his left hand, and grabbed as if to draw his knife with his right: that Robert Brubaker had a knife like a butcher knife which he was then wearing in a sheath: that Robert Brubaker and the defendant struggled with each other for the pistol - during the scuffle the pistol went off two or three times: that the defendant was brought to his knees, but immediately rose jerked his pistol from Robert: that Robert reached for his knife, Glenn fired, Bob wheeled around and threw his hand as if to get his knife, said "damn you" or something of that sort and Glenn fired again and Robert fell: that Robert never drew his knife: that before the entrance of Frank into the house there had been no hostile demonstration on the part either of the deceased or the defendant - so far as the witness knew. It was stated by Barney another witness on the said trial, that on the Thursday previous to the difficulty Frank Brubaker, Robert not being present, said that if the defendant came up there meaning to a ranch occupied by the deceased and claimed by the defendant he would kill him: that he Frank wished the defendant to come up and by the Gods he would be the death of him.
GlennNoticeOfAppeal.pdfSupreme Court of California Decision: THE PEOPLE v. GLENN, July Term, 1858
Supreme Court of California Decision: THE PEOPLE v. GLENN, July Term, 1858
10cal32.pdfHow I was able to deduce my relationship to Isaac Glenn
How I was able to deduce my relationship to Isaac Glenn
Having heard growing up that one of our relations was one of the earliest criminal defendants in California, I was very interested in knowing exactly how we were related. To my disappointment, however, I found that the California Supreme Court decision made no mention of the defendant's first name. The following describes how I was able to deduce that the defendant in this case was in fact my 2nd great-grandfather, Isaac C. Glenn, something which I was able to confirm once I received the actual records of the trial from the California State Archives.
1. The case made several references to the defendant's brother-in-law, who was called as a witness both during the trial, and as I subsequently discovered, the grand jury investigation.
"That there was a living witness was known to the government, ... This witness was James Wene, and the law made him a witness for the government, notwithstanding the fact that he had married a sister of the defendant's wife", (page 2 - emphasis added).
"The part of the declaration in reference to Wene was not objected to on the trial upon the ground now taken, and if it had been, there was no error, as Wene might properly have been connected, as a particeps criminis." (page 3)
"It appears from the testimony that there were only four persons present during the conflict. These were the defendant and his brother-in-law, Urin, and the brothers Francis and Robert Brubaker ... From the testimony of Urin, he was not in a position to see, and did not know who fired the first shot, Francis or the defendant", (page 4 - emphasis added).
2. I was able to determine that my GG-Grandfather, Isaac Glenn, married a woman named Harriett Munson from the record of their marriage.
3. I discovered in the Urban J. Munson household enumerated in the 1860 Census immediately after Isaac Glenn one James Uren, followed in the same household by a woman named Louisa and a child, Lizetta. Suspecting some relationship between James and Louisa, I searched for any marriage that he may have been a party to, whereupon I found that he had married a Louisa Munson in 1856.
4. Based on their marriage and census records, I knew that these people all lived in San Joaquin County around the time of the case.
5. The "James Wene" and "Urin" mentioned in the case had to be the same individual, since it described both as the defendant's brother-in-law, and since it indicated that there was only one other living witness besides the defendant.
6. James Wene/Urin had to be the same person as James Uren, the first name matching perfectly, and "Urin" being a plausible spelling of his last name. Further, as handwritten on the census, I thought "Uren" could easily be misinterpreted as "Wren" or even "Wene", so it seemed quite plausible that his name may have been mistakenly transcribed at some point.
Thus, barring any other persons with a similar name to Uren, living in San Joaquin County around this time and having a brother-in-law named Glenn who had married a sister of his wife, it seemed reasonable to conclude that Isaac Glenn, my 2nd great-grandfather, was in fact the defendant in the People v. Glenn.
The amusing thing is that, having arrived at this conclusion and being none too proud of it to boot, I presented my proof to my mother, who very quickly informed me, "Oh sure, Glenn was your Grandfather's Grandfather". As it turns out, his relationship was no mystery to my father, and he had at some point shared this knowledge with my mother. Moreover, he had also researched this case, and as I later discovered, even obtained the same records of it from the California State Archives. Nonetheless, I didn't allow the fact that my mother already knew this to diminish my pleasure from having figured this out the hard way.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse