Horrific assault prompts suicide at old Amador County Courthouse

First and foremost, Welcome to my blog!! Thank you for choosing this story to read. Before you delve into this tragic tale, I want to share something with you. While I was researching and writing this blog, my friend, Historian Carolyn Fregulia was busy taking a deep dive into this story even further, although I didn't know it at the time. When I found out, I decided to leave this particular story out of my newest book, "Stories of the Forgotten III: Tales of the Mother Lode."

Originally, I had wanted to add it and delve even deeper into the story, but once I found out that Carolyn was already working on this story (along with many others), I decided to leave the chapter itself out of my book.

So, although I cover this story briefly here on this blog post, I wanted to share with you that Carolyn should have her retelling of this story, which should be a deep dive into the Lintellac's history, in an upcoming project of hers in the near future! I am certainly looking forward to it!

If you are unfamilar with her work, she has authored several books, including "Italians in the Gold Country,"  & "Logging in the Central Sierra," among others. If you haven't read any of her work, I strongly suggest that you do!

Now, without further adieu, -- on with the story.......

On Monday, February 22, 1909, a man by the name Joseph Coholich committed a very heinous crime in Amador County. Now, the newspapers reported his last name as Chahalich or sometimes Chachalich, and even his Find-a-Grave memorial spelled his name as Choalich, but his death record in the California Death Index was recorded as Coholich.

Per the Amador Dispatch, dated February 26, 1909:

"Early in the afternoon of Monday a horseman, greatly excited rode into town and notified Sheriff Gregory that Mrs. Lintillac had been shot by Chahalich. Gregory and Leverone immediated started for the Lintillac place. Upon their arrival there they found Chahalich gone and questioned the woman, learning from her the following particulars: Mrs. Lintillac shortly after dinner, was hanging out clothes near the house, and Chahalich, who had worked about the place, approached her carrying a shot-gun and demanded of her $25.50 which he claimed was coming to him for wages.

She replied they did not owe him that much as he had not worked for a time during the rainy weather, and also that he was indebted to them for board in the sum of $20, besides $2 for brandy, that all he had coming was $7, and told him he had better see her husband about it. Chahalich, who was standing about six feet from the woman, raised his gun and shot her in the legs twice."

The article, which is lengthy, goes on to state that the Sheriff went on to the Campanola's cabin where the suspect had been known to stop by for the past two weeks. The authorities found the shot-gun and a blue shirt that the suspect had been wearing, and so they knew he had stopped there before moving on. When questioned, Campanola denied any knowledge of the situation. It was ascertained that Joseph Coholich had walked across Campanola's property, through the fields approximately seven miles, all the way westward to Jackson, avoiding roadways.

By the time Joseph Coholich reached Jackson, he made the steep trek up Summit Street to the old Courthouse. According to testimony by eye-witness Thomas Lemin, Coholich was walking back and forth in front of the courthouse at about 5 p.m. that evening. The two men struck up a conversation, as Coholich sat down on the steps and began eating an orange.  Shortly thereafter, Coholich belted out a painful groan and fell backwards into convulsions. When the onlooker tried to help him, he shook his head and stated that it was "too late." Still, two doctors arrived to the scene, Dr. Sprague and Dr. Gall, who both realized that he had been poisoned. They moved Coholich to the courtyard of the jail, and he expired within about 10 minutes. 

When the body was searched, they found a vial of strychnine in his pocket and about 25 grains were missing. They believed he had put the poison in the orange that he ate, committing suicide instead of facing the legal consequences for his actions. Joseph Coholich had no family in the states, and it was assumed his wife was still home in the "old country." The newspapers stated that he was originally from Austria, yet his Find-a-Grave states he was from Italy. It is obvious that he may have been from Austria, having travelled to the U.S. by way of Italy, but by the spelling or pronunciation of his name it is obvious he was of Serbian or Croation descent. 

Joseph Coholich was buried without a marker in the Jackson City Cemetery just next door to the Catholic Cemetery.  

While continuing my research, I discovered that Mrs. Lucie Lintellac was forced to have her limbs amputated due to her grave injuries;  one limb being amputated just below the knee, while the other just at the ankle bone. Sadly, it appears that her wounds never healed properly that her health continued to decline. As of the March 12, Amador Ledger, her funeral notice appeared. Although the newspapers stated she was buried in St. Patrick's Catholic Cemetery, I have been unable to locate her gravesite as of yet. I am still avidly searching for that piece of the puzzle, as I would really like to pay my respects to this innocent victim of this very wicked assault.

In my line of work, I stumble upon some of the saddest stories. I share them for one reason, so that their names and their lives will not be forgotten. Mrs. Lintellac, and even Joseph for that matter, have been forgotten in the pages of archived newspapers and old dusty death indexes that have been shelved for over a 100 years. My effort is to bring back those people's stories, to give them back a voice. To share their story for them, since they obviously can no longer share it on their own. 

I hope that although this history was a bit dark, and unfortunately did not have a happy ending, that you can appreciate it is still a part of local history, nonetheless.  Thank you for taking the time to read this and to remember the stories of the forgotten.--  (J'aime Rubio, Copyright 2024)

Some of my sources: California Death Index, Amador Ledger, 3/12/1909; Amador Dispatch, 2/26/1909; Bluelake Advocate, 2/27/1909; Stockton Independent, 2/23/1909; Union Democrat, 2/27/1909; San Francsico Call, 2/23/1909. 

Historic Roseville slaying offers insights to ‘cursed’ family

 

Los Angeles Herald

26 Feb 1876

Do you believe that death and tragedy seem to follow certain people?

In the case of David Turley, they indeed seemed to follow him, leading him straight to the gallows. The question for modern history lovers is, why?  It was April 1, 1875, and a group of men were headed back to Roseville on horseback, returning from a race at a ranch several miles beyond the city limits. 

Among the group was William H. Shaw and David Turley. Several newspapers reported both men, who worked in Roseville as Sheepshearers, were intoxicated when they started to quarrel nearby the 12 Mile House, once located at South Cirby and Old Auburn Road. Other newspapers claimed the incident took place on Old Marysville Road, 12 miles from Roseville. Today, it is hard to be certain of the exact location.

What words were exchanged still remains a mystery. Some accounts even suggested that it was an April Fools’ joke gone wrong. Whatever was said, it prompted Turley to challenge Shaw to a duel — a threat designed to make the other take back whatever negative remark was said. Shaw refused to duel Turley and tried to get away from him. Turley pulled his pistol out and fired two shots in Shaw’s direction, hitting and killing him.  

The trial was held in Sacramento and became highly publicized, making headlines in papers all the way to Los Angeles. One of the witnesses, Creed Haymond, stated for the defense that Turley was too intoxicated to have known what he was doing, therefore he believed it wasn’t his fault. The other four witnesses together confirmed that Turley did in fact shoot Shaw as he was attempting to leave.

Turley insisted that his actions were caused by an inherited mental illness. He also claimed that this inherited psychosis contributed to many deaths in his family; however, Judge Ramage did not allow this information in the trial. When all was said and done the jury found Turley guilty of murdering Shaw. The defendant eventually took his appeal to the Supreme Court, alleging errors were made during his trial. The Supreme Court came back unanimously on November 16, 1875, deciding that the initial court ruling was correct, and that Turley’s conviction would remain the same.

So was the story Turley claimed about his family true, or just a desperate attempt to spare his own life?

Extensive research into the matter reveals that David Turley’s tragic family background was stranger than most would imagine. His father, Jesse Turley, was a wealthy and well respected farmer. According to Missouri historian Rhonda Chalfant, Jesse Turley was the first landowner in the Pettis County to free his slaves due to his support for the Union during the Civil War, prompting his own neighbors to engage in two attempts to murder him. Both times he was shot and survived. Sadly though, Jesse Turley’s life ended at his own hand, after his own gun discharged by accident while he was mounting his horse during a stint in the Missouri State Militia. He was hit in the abdomen and died shortly thereafter. 

David Turley’s mother, Lucy, was also killed by an accidental bullet — shot by one of her other sons, William, while he was sleepwalking with his gun. Like David Turley, William Turley was also in the state militia, and was never the same after killing their mother. William was later done in during a raid in the Civil War involving Confederate General Joseph Shelby. One of David Turley’s sisters had a stroke, rendering her brain damaged for life, while his other sister couldn’t handle the bizarre death of their mother, and literally went insane. She also died in a relatively short period. A third brother, John Turley, was killed in Kansas around 1875, while a fourth brother, Thomas, was shot in Texas the same year.

 David Turley had left Missouri to California in 1857 after getting into some sort of “trouble.” Following his father’s death, he inherited a large amount of money and so he moved back to Missouri. He opened a saloon in Georgetown and moved in with a well-known woman of ill-repute. David’s surviving brother, James, had tried to convince a doctor to have him committed to an asylum at Fulton due to erratic behavior. The Sedalia Bazoo Newspaper stated that besides being his own best customer at his saloon, David Turley was known to get into fights at the drop of a hat and quick to draw his blade or his gun — often times shooting at people for “imaginary offenses.”

It was after getting into too much trouble in Georgetown that David decided to head back to California. 

James Turley, a.k.a. “Sedalia Jim,”  was a former policeman who ultimately spent his entire savings, an estimated $2000, to help with David’s defense for killing Shaw. James tried to prove that his brother was mentally ill.  It was James who wrote Colonel John F. Phillips, asking him to help gather affidavits to prove David was insane, a danger to himself or others, and that he needed to be committed rather than executed.

Even after a petition was sent to California Governor William Irwin with numerous signatures begging for a reprieve, nothing was done to explore if David Turley suffered from mental illness. By 8 a.m. on Feb. 25, 1876, David Turley was given notice that Irwin was not going to grant him clemency.

The Daily Alta California newspaper chronicled the last hours of David Turley’s life in detail, including his request to meet with Father Patrick Scanlon to be baptized as a Christian and be read his last rites. It was noted that people were lined up outside the building in hopes of catching sight of the hanging. At 2 p.m. Turley was marched up to the scaffold, a large shroud was placed over his clothes and a hood over his head. After a short prayer, it was documented that Turley shouted, “Mother, mother I am coming!”  as the rope dropped.  Although his neck was broken instantly, his pulse continued for another fifteen minutes until the doctor pronounced him dead. 

In the end, although Turley was not given a chance to prove his mental state to the courts, we now know that he obviously suffered from something that made him very violent. Whether the Turley family as a whole suffered from inherited bad tempers, some sort of psychosis or chemical imbalances, they all seemed to have been affected by it. Most of David’s brothers were shot in the same way that Turley shot Shaw: Death didn’t just follow the Turley Family, it seems to have chased after them with a vengeance. Yet, by the lifestyles that they chose, the male members of the Turleys died the very way in which they lived. As the saying goes, “live by the sword, die by the sword,” so all men are responsible to face the consequences of their own actions, just as David Turley did on that day in 1876.

 By: J'aime Rubio --

Originally published on March 27, 2015 in the Roseville Press-Tribune.  Reposted with permissions Courtesy of Gold Country Media.

 

 

Finding The Officially Recognized Photograph of Julia Bulette - Putting the Revisionist Ideas To Bed At Last!

 

1. Official Carte-de-Visite of Julia Bulette, Nevada Historical Society
2. Photograph of Alfred Doten, Nevada Historical Society 

Back in 2019, I covered the story of the Comstock's most famous courtesan, Julia Bulette in its entirety. From explaining and debunking fakelore surrounding her ever ellusive backstory, down to sharing the particulars surrounding her death and even her burial. As I explained in my blog, "The Comstock Courtesan, Part 1" and in the chapter (of the same name) in my book "More Stories of the Forgotten," no one knows exactly where Julia came from. This is a fact. 

Despite sharing all of this with the world, one thing seems to keep popping back up, the debate on what Julia Bulette looked like. This ongoing debate has gone on since at least the 1930s or 1940s, when the McBrides hung a photo in their "Bucket of Blood" Saloon, claiming to be the likeness of Julia Bulette and causing controversy.

FALSE PHOTO- NOT JULIA BULETTE
dated Circa 1880s

There's one problem. It's not Julia!  The photograph posted just above which I have titled "False Photo," was actually examined and dated by a professional, and it turned out that the woman in the photograph could not possibly be Julia, as it was determined to have been taken in the 1880s. 

According to Sheryln Hayez-Zorn, Curator of History at the Nevada Historical Society, the photo in question is not Julia Bulette. Given the fact the photo was dated to the 1880s, and Julia was murdered in 1867, this alone proves that specific photograph could not be our Julia. Anyone who knows the common dress and hairstyle of different time periods would know that, but still, it didn't stop the unknowledgable from making such claims.

Still, these debates have gone on for too long. So, today I am going to share with you what I have been trying to tell everyone for a very, very long time.  The only photograph of Julia Bulette known in existence is the one taken in the Sutterley Brothers studio in Virginia City.

Ms. Hayes-Zorn confirmed that the well-known carte-de-visite of a woman standing in the Sutterley Brothers portrait studion next to a fireman's hat in the dark dress is the ONLY officially recognized photograph of Julia Bulette. 

To add more credence to this, I have taken it upon myself to line up two photographs side by side for comparison at the top of this blog post. 

"The Alf Doten photo of him wearing the fireman's helmet and with the same background only adds to the authentication of her photograph. There are other's of the early Comstock time period that can be seen with the same background."-- Sheryln Hayes-Zorn, Curator of History, Nevada Historical Society

The first photograph on the left is of Julia Bulette, and was taken on the Fourth of July, 1866. The photograh to the right, is of Alfred Doten, taken on the Fourth of July, 1867. As you can see, they are both standing in the same studio with the same backdrop. The photos, taken one year apart show that they were taken around the same time period in history. 

The day that the photograph of Julia was taken was said to have been a very special day for her, as reports mention that she was chosen to be a honorary member of the Fire Company #1 on that date, and that was the day she was able to ride in the parade with them for the Fourth of July Festivities. 

The newspaper spoke of the entire city taking part in the festivities, including many different groups appearing in the parade. One mention was that "Virginia Engine Company No. 1 had a magnificent six-horse team attached to their engine, beautifully decorated with flowers and evergreens."

Think about that for a moment. Why wouldn't Julia have wanted a photograph to remember this special day? Especially given the fact that she wasn't rich and famous as many people have made her out to be over the years. This was her day to shine, and for once she wasn't just a prostitute, she was somebody even if just for the day, and for that day she was treated like a "somebody." I am sure that was a good memory for her. 

If you examine the photograph, you can see she is standing next to a fireman's hat, wearing a fireman belt buckle with the number 1 on it.  Her dress is plain, as was the attire of the period for any woman at that time. The belt buckle correlates her connection to Fire Company #1, whom cared for her so much that when she died, they were the ones who held her body until the day of her funeral, and they buried her in a plot that was reserved for the firemen in the original old Pioneers Cemetery, also known as Flowery Hill. 

That's another thing people don't seem to understand, in regards to why her grave is so far out there and why its location is virtually unknown today. So why bury her way out on Flowery Hill and not in the other cemeteries? Well, when Julia died, those other cemeteries didn’t exist yet. You have to remember, this was 1867. The only cemetery there at the time was the old Pioneer Cemetery or Boot Hill Cemetery which was known as “Flowery Hill.”

 According to “Mercantile Guide and Directory for Virginia City, Gold Hill, Silver City and American City,” compiled by Charles Collins, 1864-65, it states: “This city can now boast of a public burial place for the dead, the ground formerly known as the Flowery Hill Cemetery has been purchased for its owner, J.B. Wallard, by the city, at a cost of twenty-five hundred dollars. The City Council are taking the necessary steps to have the grounds, laid off in a manner which, when completed, will reflect credit on the good taste of its projectors. The tract contains 27 acres. A portion of the grounds has been reserved and laid off for the exclusive use of the firemen of this city.”— 

 Another publication “A History of the Virginia Exempt Firemen’s Association Cemetery” states “Although a firemen’s section had been laid out in the Pioneer Cemetery on Flowery Hill years before, in May of 1868 the Virginia Fire Department purchased a section of the Silver Terrace Cemetery for its use from undertakers Charles M. Brown and Josh W. Wilson for $50.00."

So, you can see the fire department loved her, because they buried her in their section of the cemetery that was reserved for them. The only reason they no longer buried their own in that same area was because two years later they purchased a different section of the newer Silver Terrace Cemetery, and the old pioneer cemetery became defunct and forgotten over time. 

Back to the subject...

Going back to the subject at hand, there are some who still question whether this carte-de-visite really was Julia, because she was dressed rather plainly for a prostitute.  

In reality, what do you think a prostitute looked like in 1867?

In my research, many times, I have found that prostitutes outside of their boudoir would dress the same as any other woman of the time period. It seems that the world has a romanticized view of what they think a prostitute looked or dressed like based on television and movies. 

I recall a historian telling me once many years ago that the only difference between a lady and a prostitute at that time period was that a lady didn't look up and stare a man in his face, as it was improper; However, a prostitute didn't have the fear of improprieties and would have no problem looking a man in the face as she spoke to him.  The point the historian was making was that during normal daily activities outside of the brothel, a prostitute would have dressed in the normal fashion of the day.

When I asked Ms. Hayes-Zorn on her opinion about this subject, she confirmed this with me by saying:

 "Julia and any other woman or prostitute that went outside of their bedroom or home, would dress according to Victorian standards on the types of activities or time of day. In her photograph, she is wearing good quality clothing but it is not competing with the fireman's belt or helmet.  You are correct, I believe people have a romanticized view of how a prostitute would dress or behave due to movies and television.  Women wouldn't stare at men or talk with strangers (men) without a formal introduction by friends and family, or be alone with a man without a chaperone."-- 

So, today we have discussed the facts that there is only one officially recognized photograph of Julia Bulette in existence, and the fact that just because she looked "plain Jane" in her photograph didn't mean it wasn't Julia, just because she didn't "look" like what some people think a prostitute should have looked like back then.

Writer, Susan James once said on the subject of Julia, "So little was known about her life that her attributes could be greatly enhanced without fear of contradiction…writers speculated about Julia’s ancestry. The fact that she might have lived in Louisiana was all they needed to transform the fair-skinned Englishwoman into an enticing New Orleans Creole. Exotic beauty was not among Julia’s assets, but it didn’t hurt to stretch the truth a bit.” --"Queen of Tarts"

In reality, we will never know for certain just where Julia Bulette came from. What we do know is what she looked like. No, she wasn't a dark skinned or mixed raced prostitute. She wasn't even remarkably beautiful by societal standards of the time, but she was cared for by those who chose to remember her and honor her after her death. 

In life, I do not believe she lived well, nor do I believe she was treated like a lady by any means, but I do believe that everyone deserves their stories to be told and we all owe the dead the truth. Julia lived a hard life in a time where life was hard enough as it was. She didn't make life any easier on herself chosing the oldest profession in the book, but that was the choice she made. Love her or hate her, she did however leave her mark in Virginia City, one that cannot easily be erased.

Rest in Peace, Julia Bulette.

(Copyright 2023 - J'aime Rubio, www.jaimerubiowriter.com) 

A big thanks to Sheryln Hayes-Zorn and the Nevada Historical Society for helping me with this additional project!

Some of my Sources:

"More Stories of the Forgotten," J'aime Rubio, 2019

Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]), 05 July 1866

Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, January 22, 1867

A History of the Virginia Exempt Firemen’s Association Cemetery, Steve Frady, 1980-1987

Mercantile Guide and Directory for Virginia City, Gold Hill, Silver City and American City, Charles Collins, 1864-65 

“Queen of Tarts,” by Susan James in Nevada Magazine, Sept/Oct 1984