History of California, Volume VI, Part 37

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885-1890
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 816

USA > California > History of California, Volume VI > Part 37

Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).

333

REVENUE SYSTEM.

the means of paying the liabilities already contracted, of defraying current expenses, or of completing her

arrived during the night-10 men under Lundy and 12 under Tracy, who placed themselves under Gen. Winn. Four prisoners were taken, John Hughes, James R. Coffman, William B. Cornogg, and a man whose name is not given in any of the accounts of the squatter war. The arrival of the second party frightened to death Allen's wife, who was lying ill in the house. Allen escaped sorely wounded, and was traced next day to the river, where it was supposed he was drowned. Sac. Transcript Extra, Aug. 16, 1850. But he survived, suffering much, until, reaching a mining camp, he received assist- ance. Moore's Pioneer Express, MS., 8-10. Great grief and indignation were felt over the death of Sheriff Mckinney, who was generally esteemed. He had been but a short time married, and his wife was distraught with grief. P. F. Ewer, coroner, assumed the duties of sheriff and paid a visit to Brighton, arresting a man named Hall, who was found in hiding near Allen's house. Threats of lynching were made against the prisoners, but better counsels prevailed, and it was determined to abide by the laws. The steamer Senator had returned from S. F. on the night of the 15th with the lieut-gov. and two companies of volunteers, namely, the California Guard, Capt. W. D. M. Howard, and Protection Engine Co., of the fire department, Capt. Shay, under arms, and together numbering 150 men. Connor, Early Cal., MS., 6; S. F. Picayune, Aug. 16, 1850. There was no longer any need of their services, the squatter leaders being dead and wounded, and the citizens having resolved to leave their wrongs to be adjudicated by the courts.

At this juncture the newspapers entered into a discussion of the merits of the cause on both sides. The Settlers' and Miners' Tribune, of Oct. 30, 1850, in answering the S. F. Picayune of the 17th, says that it is wrong to condemn squatterism as the foundation of a party; for 'Sutterism in Upper California has too long despoiled her of her inheritance, and self-defence requires her interference.' Immigrants expected to find public land, and found it; but 'Sutterism has squatted all over it, and pretends to claim it under a Mexican grant which does not exist.' The legislature was charged with making laws expressly to protect Sutter, with or without a title to that part of the state. This charge was in reference to an act passed April 22, 1850, which forbade any forcible entry, the penalty being a fine and restitution, if the justice should so order. No proof of title was required. Cal. Statutes, 1850, 425. In Cal., and in the Cal. sense, said the Tribune, legislators and judges were anti- squatter-their decisions invariably anti-squatter; while if the squatters dif- fered from them, and dared to appeal to the supreme court, they were said to have forfeited all support from the state govt, and even its protection. The unrecognized courts of Cal. were not the places where land titles should be determined. Squatterism was made a party issue because the natural and constitutional rights of the people were sought to be wrested from them by men of the stamp of the Picayune writers. When anti-squatterism ceases to prey, then the squatter party will cease to exist. Such were the utterances of the settlers after the Sac. affair, as well as before. But the Picayune had, soon after the riot, urged a calm and considerate review of the affair, and pleaded many things in extenuation of the course pursued by the squatters, ad- vising 'the greatest moderation, mingled with firmness, which the adminis- tration of justice requires.' This, in point of fact, was the course into which the administration of law resolved itself. There was a good deal to be sail on the side of the squatters, seriously as they had blundered. Robinson and the other prisoners, who were indicted by the grand jury for murder, were admitted to bail in Nov. A change of venue was obtained, and the 'cloud of indictments melted away like the last cloud-flake of our rainy season,' as says Prof. Josiah Royce, who has ably presented the subject of the Sac. squatter riot in the Overland Monthly for Sept. 1885, as an example how Mexican grants were dealt with by American settlers in Cal. Yet I think he would

334

POLITICAL HISTORY.

organization and putting in operation her system of local government. Her securities, dismally depre-

have found better illustrations elsewhere; for, as he himself shows, there was good ground-in the belief of the squatters that the Alvarado grant did not extend to Sac., and in the fact that the Micheltorena grant was actually in- valid-for the feeling of the squatters that Sutter was playing into the hands of a set of soulless speculators, who used the pretence of a grant for securing paper titles to the best portions of Cal. Accounts of the squatter troubles of 1850 are contained in the newspapers of the day, particularly in the Sac. Transcript. See also the S. F. Cal. Courier, S. F. Pac. News, S. F. Alta, S. F. Picayune, and S. F. Herald, extending over a long period. There is an account of the riot in Sac. Illustrated, 13-18; Upham, Notes, 333-51; in Cul- ver's Sac. Directory, 78-9; in Thomas' Directory Sac., 1871, 66-75; in Hist. Sac. Co., 50-6; and references in Tuthill's Cal., 336-7; Sac. Bee, Nov. 1, 1871; Bauer's Statement, MS., 9; and Winans' Statement, MS., 20-1. The theory has been advanced that to the riot of 1850 was due the great depression in business, and the numerous failures which followed. I think the conclusion erroneous. The population suddenly declined, but certainly not because peo- ple were frightened away by an incident of this kind. It was the uncertainty of land titles in the vicinity which the squatter movement exposed. Had the squatters prevailed, the population would have remained, and the loss to a few individual lot-owners would have been far less than the whole community sustained by their defeat. S. F. Bulletin, Nov. 2, 1877. I do not wish to be understood as saying that the squatters were right. As the evidence after- ward proved, they were in the wrong. But it would have been better for Sac. could they have maintained their position; for how could a city hope to prosper surrounded by a country to which no one could for a long time obtain a clear title? The courts finally decided that all the sales made by Burnett as Sutter's agent were valid. Could the founders of Sac. have foreseen the contention to arise out of the location of their city, the trouble might have been avoided.

Squatters also gave trouble in S. F. in Jan. 1851, S. F. Alta, Feb. 3, 1851, which continued for more than a year. Nathaniel Page commenced the erec- tion of a building on a lot belonging to the Leidesdorff estate, and sold to Captain Folsom. A collision occurred, in which Folsom shot at Page, whose watch arrested the ball, and saved his life. Page's lumber was thrown into the bay. In April 1833 Sheriff W. W. Twist and posse of Santa Barbara were about to take possession of a cannon to use in ejecting a squatter named John Powers from the rancho Arroyo Burro, belonging to Hill and Den. A Californian, Alejo Servis, stabbed the sheriff, who turned and shot him dead. Firing then became general between the sheriff's party and the squatter party, and J. A. Vidall, a squatter, was killed. Hill and Den were placed in possession. S. F. Altı, May 7 and June 8, 1853. During this year there appeared to be something like an organized revival of squatterism. All about S. F., at the presidio and the mission, lots were settled upon without title. One of the public squares was treated as public domain. The Odd Fellows' cemetery was seized, which two years before had been conveyed by deed to the society by Sam Brannan. On the 20th of July a squatter named McCarty, who had taken possession of a vacant lot on the corner of Second and Mission streets, belonging to Robert Price, resisted, and shot the sheriff who was at- tempting to eject him; McCarty was also shot, both seriously; but Price was placed in possession.

It was believed that an organization of wealthy men were at the bottom of the squatterism of 1853, who furnished means for carrying on the seizures of lots with a view to obtaining the lion's share. Attempts were made to squat on the Peralta claim in Alameda the same year. In June 1854 a pitched battle was fought between a party of squatters on Folsom's property on First street, S. F., and a party of 15 placed to deiend it. George D. Smith was

335

SAN FRANCISCO DEFRAUDED.

ciated, afforded slight compensation to those who were forced to receive them for services rendered. The effect on the cities and particularly on San Francisco was deplorable. Heir to lands worth millions of dol- lars, she was practically bankrupt. Sales of lots were arrested by the doubt thrown upon her title; or if any one took them, it was experimentally, at prices much below their value. A commissioner appointed to in- quire into the extent and value of city property was, after a lengthy examination, unable to determine if there were any lands rightly belonging to the city, unless by preemption, which right congress had not yet extended to them. Had congress accorded the cities a relinquishment of the interests of the United States in the lands within their municipal juris- dictions, it would greatly have simplified matters for them, and infinitely enhanced their resources. An- other point of interest with the people was whether or not speculators should be permitted to buy up the public lands to which no shadow of a Mexican grant attached ; and this, it was insisted, was legitimate ground for a

killed in this fight, and several persons wounded. After this affair the prop- erty holders in S. F. organized, and 43 policemen were added to the force. Houses were fortified and besieged. In one house on Green street a woman holding a child in her arms was shot and killed. The occasion of this outbreak was that the title of the city of S. F. was undergoing examination by commis- sioners; all kinds of rumors were afloat, and opportunities supposed to be afforded of securing lots. For several years more these troubles were recur- ring. The Sac. Union of June 29, 1855, suggested as a remedy to 'fee no lawyers'-an excellent suggestion. Felice Argenti, sent by Brown Bros, bankers of Colon, to Cal. as their agent, in 1819 amassed a fortune of several millions, but his suits with S. F. for certain lands cost him the larger share of his wealth. Torres, Perip., 101-2. In 1836 was the famous case of the Green claim, when the vigilants arrested the holder of important documents concerning the city's title to the mission lands, on a trumped-up charge, in order to get possession of those documents, which Green himself had ob- tained by trickery from Tiburcio Vasquez, and which he sold to his captors for $12,500, though he brought suit afterward for $50,000 damages, of which he obtained $150. Green's (A. A.) Life and Adv., MS., 1-86. This manuscript of Green's, of about 90 pp., is a most interesting contribution to the literature of land titles, containing the history in detail of the Santillan claim. S. F. Alta, June 7 and 21, 1878. In 1858 a party of squatters in Sonoma county attacked and drove from his land one of the owners of the Peñas rancho, com- pelling him to sign a release of his property to them. They almost captured the town of Healdsburg in an attempt to take Dr Fitch, another owner; and attacked the government surveyor Mandeville, destroying his papers. But such acts as these were performed by a few ruffians taking advantage of the squatter sentiment. S. F. Bulletin, Apr. 13, 1858.

336

POLITICAL HISTORY.

party in politics-ground which California senators found themselves unable to ignore.26

The legislature adjourned April 22d. Congress had again disappointed the people.27 In January, the California delegation had taken its departure for Washington to urge the claims of the state to be im- mediately admitted. It was high time. In 1849 the citizens of San Francisco had banished the worst of its criminals. In 1850 a straw authority attempted to hold lawlessness in check, but it had attained such strength that years were afterward required to get it under control. In spite of these drawbacks a great deal had been accomplished. It was no small achieve- ment for the American portion of the population in so short a time to have so regulated mining, the chief in- dustry of the country, that a heterogeneous multitude from the four corners of the earth could work together in peace; and to so administer justice in the occupa- tion of the mines that individuals and companies were willing to be governed by laws formed in mining camps. The general perfection of the rules adopted was such that neither congress nor the state legislature ever attempted to improve upon their essential fea- tures. Thus good and evil grew side by side, while men longingly waited to catch the first whisper of the words "admitted to the union."

The question of the admission of California had become the chief topic in congress; and whenever the word 'California' was pronounced close after came the word 'slavery.' All through 1849 the subject of providing a government for California was discussed, and at every point it was met by objections originat- ing in a fear of disturbing the balance of power in

26 Settlers' and Miners' Tribune, Oct. 30, 1850; Sac. Transcript, Nov. 29, 1850.

27 Speaker Bigler in his valedictory address alluded to that 'most embar- rassing question of domestic policy,' which to his regret had kept Cal. out of the union. S. F. Pac. News, Apr. 27, 1850; S. F. Herald, Oct. 22, 1850.

337

ADMISSION AS A STATE.

the senate to the prejudice of slavery. The growth of the nation had reached that critical point when its affairs could no longer be safely referred to a sectional interpretation of the constitution; or the constitution being faulty, when the nation could no longer strictly abide by it; or when, conceding it to be a perfect in- strument, one portion of the people refused to abide by it at the will of the other portion. The conces- sions made to the slave states when the union was formed, on account of their weakness in population, and when the growth of slavery by importation and natural increase was not clearly foreseen, had placed the sceptre of political power in the hands of the south, where for thirty-eight years out of fifty it had remained. The profits derived from cotton-planting with slave labor had enabled the men of the south to abjure labor for themselves, to employ their leisure in congenial pursuits at home, in foreign education and travel, and in politics. Their senators in congress were men who assumed an air of nobility on account of their exemption from the cares of trade, whose habits on their plantations gave them a dictatorial manner, even in the society of their peers, that their generous culture could not always sufficiently soften ; and it was yearly more openly asserted that the ruling class in the United States was the planter class. Cotton was king; but a cotton manufacturer and a cotton-cloth seller were contemptible in the eyes of this pampered, self-constituted aristocracy.

There was a middle class in the south, which aped all that was offensive in the manners of the cultivated class, and were loud in their praises of chivalry, and their scorn of northern 'mudsills.' Even the 'poor white trash,' which constituted a class despised even. by the slaves, regarded the institution as something sacred, and a 'southern gentleman' as a being far above anything in the free states. So strong are the teachings of custom and prejudice !

Such a condition of society was not contemplated by HIST. CAL., VOL. VI. 22

338

POLITICAL HISTORY.

the framers of the constitution. It was opposed to the nature of the republican government, and soon or late must introduce discord. In 1846 that discord was already strongly apparent; and the southern press did not conceal the fact that the south regarded itself as destined to have the mastery on the American continent. In congress, certainly, these boasts were sparingly alluded to; but they had their influence. Congressmen and senators talked about the rights of the two sections under the constitution. The acquisi- tion of New Mexico and California, which the south had plotted and fought for,28 had brought with it new issues and a determined struggle. It was a battle between intellectual giants for a cherished idea.

Regarded from a sentimental stand-point, the sudden collapse of great expectations appeals to our sympathy, although the means resorted to in support of them may not command our confidence. The gaunt Caro- linian, he of the burning eyes, pointing his fateful finger toward his adversary, and giving utterance to his fire-brand resolutions, is a striking spectacle. The polished and fiery Butler, pouring forth his reproaches against the faithless north, holds his audiences en- chained. Berrien of Georgia, logical and impressive, commands breathless attention while he, too, arraigns the north for injustice. Foote of Mississippi, correct and impressive, never hasty, sometimes half insolent, but always attractive, sets forth the wrongs of the south. Toombs of Georgia, armed at every point with accusations against the north, and demands for restitution of rights that he declares have been wrested from the south, impresses us with his eloquence, and

28 The Charleston Patriot said, referring to the Mexican war: 'We trust that our southern representatives will remember that this is a southern war.' And thus the Charleston Courier: 'Every battle fought in Mexico, and every dollar spent there, but insures the acquisition of territory which must widen the field of southern enterprise in the future. And the final result will be to readjust the whole balance of power in the confederacy so as to give us con- trol over the operations of the government in all time to come. If the south be but true to themselves, the day of our depression and suffering is gone for- ever.' Cong. Globe, 1846-7, 364; Id., 1849-50, 256. Others called it 'a south- ern war fought by southern men.'

339

NATIONAL ISSUES.

rouses us with the lash of his denunciation. These and more were the men the south sent to represent her in the national legislature; and against them was opposed the genius of Webster, Clay, Seward, Doug- las, Benton, and the cumulative talent of the nation. To the fire of the south, the great Massachusetts sen- ator opposed a collected front. "Times have changed," he said, "since the constitution was formed."

The south complained that she had always been making concessions, and instanced the ordinance of 1787, when it was agreed by Virginia that the north- west territory surrendered by her should be free ter- ritory; to which the north replied that God and nature had made that free territory, and slavery could not exist there, had there been no ordinance against it.29 The Missouri compromise of 1820 was called another concession by the south; but the north contended that it was not an unfair division of the Louisiana purchase, and that the admission of Missouri as a slave state was allowed to balance the admission of Maine as a free state at the same time, and that one was as much a concession as the other.

The Wilmot proviso, the south alleged, was aggress- ive. It made the condition of furnishing money to buy Mexican territory this : that no part of the terri- tory so purchased should be open to slavery. The north replied that the Mexican government had abol- ished slavery in all its territory, and the United States would not reestablish it. The south declared that wherever the constitution of the United States went, slavery went with it. And on this ground, untenable as it appears to me,30 the ship of state seemed likely

29 For a history of the ordinance of 1787, see Cong. Globe, 1849-50, App., pt i. 599.

30 Section 9 of article I. of the constitution says: 'The migration or im- portation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding $10 for each person.' That is, congress would not interfere with slavery in the then slave states for that period of time. Section 2 of article IV. declares that 'no person held to service of labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be dis-

340

POLITICAL HISTORY

to be stranded. The Wilmot proviso was not adopted, and the money was paid. In so much the south tri- umphed. But it was a barren victory; because the moment that a government was demanded for the new territory, the conflict began concerning the nature of it, and the principles of the Wilmot proviso were re- vived, to be fought over for a period of nearly two years, during which time California had passed through the events already recorded in this and previous chap- ters.

The news that California had formed for herself a free state government was ill received by southern men, who called it a northern measure, and felt them- selves wronged. It was, they said, a whig manœuvre, and due to the administration of Taylor, although in fact Riley,31 on whom the opprobrium was heaped, was intrusted with the management of California affairs by the previous administration; while King, the owner of several hundred slaves, was the agent of the whig administration in forwarding the state move- ment. It was true that King called himself a whig, but it was true also that Taylor was a native of Louisiana. Nothing was said of slavery in King's instructions; he was merely to assist California to a government, provided it could be done without danger to the authority of the United States.

charged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.' A simple construction of this article does not make it the duty of a free state to pass laws in the inter- est of slavery, or to compel its public officers to arrest and return a slave. If a horse should be found in possession of a citizen of a free state which be- longed in a slave state, it would have to be delivered up. So would a slave, and no more; but the south's most grievous complaint against the north was that it was not a good slave-catcher; and that a few northern persons were organized to make matters still worse for the barbarism there. Concerning territorial and other property, the constitution said: 'The congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state.' But the south denied the power of congress to keep slavery out of the territories; and on that ground the bat- tle was fought.

31 Cong. Globe, 1849-50, App., pt i. pp. 102-4. The prest denied anthor- izing any govt in Cal., except to suggest to the people to form a constitution to be presented to congress. See message of Jan. 21, 1850, in Cong. Globe, 1849-50, 195; Amer. Quar. Rey., iii. 603-4; Frost, Hist. Cal., 427-30; H. Ex. Doc., 31, i. no. 5, 161.

341

CALIFORNIA AT WASHINGTON.

It was an affront to the pride of the south that the outside world did not look with approval upon her pet institution, and it was a wound to the moral sensibility of the north that the whole nation shared in the re- proach. The rebuke received from both northern and southern men, and foreigners, in the exclusion of slavery from California, was extremely irritating to the former. To admit California at all under the cir- cumstances would be an humiliation. But the great point was the admission of two senators from a free state to destroy the balance of power. Once gone, it might never be restored.32 On the other hand, the north felt the perilous position it would be in should the south in its recently revealed temper ever again have control of the national councils.

Early in 1850 Mr Clay attempted a compromise by resolutions: that California, with suitable limits, be admitted; that the Wilmot proviso should not be insisted on for the territories; that the boundary line of Texas should be established so as to exclude any portion of New Mexico; that the United States should pay that part of the debt of Texas contracted before its annexation, amounting to $10,000,000, on condition that Texas should solemnly renounce any claim to any part of New Mexico; that slavery should not be abolished in the District of Columbia without the consent of the state of Maryland, of the people of the district, and just compensation to the owners of slave property ; that the export and import of slaves from and into the district, as merchandise, should be abolished ; that provision should be made by law for the restitution of fugitive slaves in any state or territory of the union; and that the trade in slaves

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of California, Volume VI, Part 37

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe Publication date: 1885-1890 Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers Number of Pages: 816

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885-1890
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 816