USA > California > San Diego County > San Diego > History of San Diego, 1542-1908 : an account of the rise and progress of the pioneer settlement on the Pacific coast of the United States, Volume II > Part 6
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).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29
VIEW TAKEN FROM FIRST AND C STREETS ABOUT 1875 At the left of the picture is shown the old Court House as it appeared at its reconstruction
J. S. Mannasse, and William E. Flynn in their places. Suit was brought to restrain the old supervisors from acting, and an appeal taken to the supreme court, the case being entitled Henck vs. French, et al. On January 27, 1871, the supreme court decided that Judge Bush had no power to remove the old supervisors or appoint new ones. In the meantime, George A. Pendleton, the old county clerk and recorder, who had been most active in trying to prevent the removal of the county seat and records, failed in health, and died March 3rd, and Judge Morrison died about the same time. The supervisors immedi- ately appointed Chalmers Scott to the vacant position, and Scott lost no time in moving the records. With a party of two or three friends, he went to Old Town one evening, loaded the records into express wagons, carried them to Horton's Addition,
385
BUILDING THE COURT HOUSE
and the following morning (April 1, 1871) was ready for busi- ness at the new place. The supervisors had rented the brick building on the northwest corner of Sixth and G Streets, now occupied by Vermillion's grocery, and this was used as a court house until a new building was constructed and ready for occu- pancy. This was the end of the court controversy and the end of the predominance of Old San Diego in the political affairs of the community.
Contracts were quickly let for the construction of a new court house, on a block donated by Mr. Horton. The ceremonies of laying the cornerstone took place on August 12, 1871. The speakers were Hon. Horace Maynard of Ohio and Judge W. T.
GORDON&HAZZARD.
GORDON & HAZZARD'S STORE
On the southwest corner of Sixth and H Streets, the present site of the Steele Block
MeNealy. The structure was completed and turned over to the county early in June, 1872, and dedicated with a grand ball on the evening of the 4th of that month, as befitted the first public building in new San Diego. The building was 60 feet wide, 100 feet deep, and 48 feet high, and had twelve rooms, includ- ing the jail. It was of brick, finished with plaster. The con- tractor was William Jorres. The cost was $55,000, paid in 20 year 7 per cent bonds.
The old building having been outgrown, its enlargement and reconstruction were begun on July 19, 1888. It was practi- cally two years under construction, being turned over to the supervisors on July 7, 1890. It is built of brick in the Italian Renaissance style and is a substantial building. The cost was $200,000. It has a frontage of 1061% feet and a depth, includ-
386
HISTORY OF SAN DIEGO
ing the jail, of 110 feet. The height, from base to dome, is 126 feet. It houses comfortably the two superior courts and all the county officials and records and is surrounded by a large, well- kept yard.
The source of San Diego's title to its pueblo or city lands is very unusual. Upon the organization of the town in 1835, it became entitled, under the Spanish and Mexican laws, to a grant of four square leagues of land. The formalities necessary to secure this grant were not completed, however, until ten years later, when Captain Henry D. Fitch surveyed the boundaries of the lands claimed and made a map. This map was submitted to and approved by Santiago Argüello, the sub-prefect of San Diego, and by Governor Pio Pico, and thereupon the lands shown on this map became the common property of the citi- zens of the pueblo, and the officials acquired power to make grants and did make many.
As this method of acquiring title was unusual, however, there was much misunderstanding, after the American occupation, and the validity of the city's title was frequently called in question. Steps were therefore taken to have it confirmed by every possible court and authority, which extended over more than twenty years, and resulted in the issuance of the patent in 1874 which settled the question forever. An extract from the report of the commissioner of the General Land Office, in the case of the contested survey of the pueblo lands of San Diego, dated December 17, 1870, will make this clearer.
The presidio of San Diego was established in May, 1769, and the pueblo organized in 1835, but no official survey of the pueblo lands appears to have been made until 1845, such sur- vey having been then executed by the proper authorities, as- sisted by citizens, among the latter being Captain Henry D. Fitch, who prepared the map of the survey. This map was approved by the prefect, who ordered and supervised the sur- vey, and was also subsequently approved by the governor, and countersigned by the secretary of the state government of the department.
On the 14th of February, 1853, the president and board of trustees of the city of San Diego filed with the board of land commissioners their petition for confirmation of the claim of said city to the aforesaid pueblo lands as delineated and de- scribed on the map prepared by Henry D. Fitch, which map accompanied the said petition, the opinion and decree of the board being as follows: "It is admitted by stipulation in this case that the present petitioners were created a body- corporate, with the above name and style, by the legislature of the State of California, on the 28th of April, 1852, and as such succeeded to all the right and claim which the city or pueblo of San Diego may have had to lands formerly be- longing to the said pueblo of San Diego. A traced copy of
387
DISPUTE ABOUT PUEBLO LANDS
an espediente from the archives in the custody of the United States Surveyor General, duly certified by that officer, is filed in the case, from which it appears that by order of the ter- ritorial government of California, the ancient presidio of San Diego was erected into a pueblo, with a regular municipal gov- ernment, in the latter part of the year 1834 and the com- mencement of 1835. It is also in proof that said town con- tinued its existence as an organized corporation until the 7th day of July, 1846, when the Americans took possession of the country. It appears further, from the depositions of San- tiago Argüello and José Matias Moreno, that in the year 1845 the boundaries of the lands assigned to said pueblo were sur- veyed and marked out under the superintendence of the former, who then filled the office of sub-prefect, and the two alcaldes of the town. That the lands were surveyed and a map of them made by Captain Henry D. Fitch, since deceased, which map was submitted to Governor Pio Pico, and duly approved by him.
Upon the claim coming before the United States district court, for the Southern District of California, at its June term, 1857, the appeal taken by the United States, in con- formity with the requirements of law, was dismissed and the decree of the board of commissioners rendered final. . A survey was made of the pueblo lands of San Diego by John C. Hays, in July, 1858, under instructions from the United States Surveyor General of California, said survey containing 48,556.69 acres, or nearly eleven square leagues, and being based upon the map prepared by Henry D. Fitch re- sembling the same in its inclusion of the more prominent land- marks, but not covering so large an area as the said map is shown to include by the position of said landmarks thereon and the scale laid down on its margin. This survey was ap- proved by the surveyor general under date of Dec. 4, 1858, was advertised in supposed conformity with the act of June 14, 1860, re-advertised under the act of July 1, 1864, in view of the ruling of the Department in similar cases and the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of the United States vs. Sepulveda, and now comes before this office for ex- amination and decision upon objections thereto filed.
It is the opinion of this office that + after having been amended, should receive the final approval of the Department.
The amendment suggested related to the exclusion of the mil- itary reservation on Point Loma. The scope of this decision was merely to define the correct boundaries of the lands to which the city was entitled. The Secretary of the Interior soon after ren- dered a final decision affirming the city's title to eleven square leagues of land, and on April 1, 1874, the United States issued a patent accordingly, since which there has never been any seri- ous question raised as to the validity of the title. It is based upon the title of the Mexican government, which passed to the United States by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, subject to the following provision :
said survey,
388
HISTORY OF SAN DIEGO
Mexicans now established in territories previously belong- ing to Mexico, and which remain for the future within the limits of the United States shall . retain the property which they possess . . . or disposing thereof, remove the proceeds wherever they please, without being subjected to any contribution, tax, or charge whatever.
PART FOURTH Period of "The Great Boom"
CHAPTER I
COMING OF THE SANTA FE
HEN the first through train arrived in San W Diego, November 21, 1885, the railroad dream which had filled the imagination of enterpris- ing citizens for more than thirty years came true. The event was the most potent influ- ence in the creation of "the great boom" and the largest single factor in making the city what it is today, yet it is difficult to relate the circumstances which preceded and followed the coming of the Santa Fe without indulging in bitter denunciation of the frenzied financiers who greedily took all that San Diego had to give and never fulfilled the promises upon the strength of which it was given.
San Diego wanted a direct route to the East, and if it could not be direct across the mountains to the Colorado River, it wanted a route as nearly direct as it was possible to build to a connection with the Atlantic & Pacific in the Mojave River region. This was essential, because it was desired to build a city at the incomparable seaport, rather than at the spot where the great city of Los Angeles now stands. San Diego and National City wanted a real terminal on the Bay "where rail and tide meet" as the basis of future commerce with the world of the Pacific.
In order to secure these advantages, San Diego and National City raised a magnificent subsidy, a part of which was sold for not less than $3,000,000 in cash, and the remainder of which has been appraised by its owners at $7,000,000. This subsidy was sufficient to defray, twice over, the entire cost of building the road from National City to Barstow, and yet the communities which contributed so generously of their substance to get a rail- road never owned a share of its stock, nor had the slightest voice in directing its policy. It was not expected, of course, that the subscribers to the subsidy would own or control the railroad, but it was expected that the road should be built and perma- nently maintained by way of the Temecula Canyon, a fairly direct route from the seaport to the East, and it was expected that the grand terminal of the Santa Fé system should be estab-
392
HISTORY OF SAN DIEGO
lished on San Diego Bay, and that the railroad would co-operate in good faith in the development of ocean commerce.
These reasonable hopes were disappointed. After a very few years, the Santa Fé moved its shops to San Bernardino, and a little later to Los Angeles; engaged joyously in booming the City of the Angels ; finally got entrance to San Francisco, its present real terminus; and consistently conspired with rival interests to deprive San Diego of commerce by sea and railroad competition by land.
These circumstances detraet nothing from the credit of those who organized the successful effort to bring the railroad to the shores of the Bay. They clearly comprehended the urgent need of transportation facilities and proceeded to meet it in what was doubtless the only possible way at that time. Nearly every- body of weight in the community co-operated in the effort and gave generously to the subsidy, in proportion to the interest they had at stake. A number of public-spirited citizens dedi- cated their time and energies to the undertaking and persisted through all obstacles until the result was accomplished. But there is one man whose service was so conspicuous and valuable as to require special acknowledgment. This is Frank A. Kim- ball, of National City, who conceived the undertaking, who ini- tiated it with the aid of a small group of citizens, who went to Boston and secured a contract with the highest officials in the Santa Fé system, who went again to renew the contract after the first one had failed, and who, with his brother, Warren Kimball, was by far the largest contributor to the subsidy.
Mr. Kimball had been trying to interest railroad promoters as far baek as 1869, when he dealt with the representative of General John C. Frémont, president of the Memphis & El Paso, which was a mere fruitless project. In 1878, he corresponded with Commodore Vanderbilt, who answered that he would not "build a mile of railroad any faster than pushed to it by competition," and with Jay Gould, who said: "I don't build railroads ; I buy them." After six months of futile correspond- ence with the railroad kings, Mr. Kimball called a secret meet- ing at the residence of E. W. Morse on Tenth Street in the spring of 1879. He and Elizur Steele represented National City, while Mr. Morse and J. S. Gordon represented San Diego. John G. Capron joined the secret committee at an early stage of the movement. It was decided that a vigorous effort should be made to induce one of the railroads then building across the continent to come to San Diego Bay. Mr. Kimball was selected to represent the committee in the East and started on his mis- sion about the first of June, 1879. The sum of $450 had been raised in San Diego and National City toward the expense of
393
KIMBALL WINS IN BOSTON
his trip, and he raised the balance by putting a mortgage on his house. He took with him the endorsement of the city author- ities and of the Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Kimball went first to Philadelphia, where he soon con- cluded that there was no hope of doing anything with the Texas & Pacific. In New York he learned what he could of the inten- tions of Stanford and Huntington and came to the conclusion that the best hope of success lay with the Santa Fé, which was determined to strike the Pacific Ocean somewhere and which, as he soon learned, was most favorably disposed to Guaymas, in Mexico.
Mr. Kimball remained in Boston about three months and his correspondence with the railroad committee during that period is an interesting picture of the times, as well as a fascinating record of the fluctuating hopes and fears of this lone emissary from the southwestern corner of the Republic. He dealt, chiefly, with Thomas Nickerson, president of the Santa Fé system, but also frequently met other officials and had some conferences with the full board of directors. Mr. Kimball's severest critics admit that he was "a terrible single-handed talker in those days," and he certainly had a big thing to talk about and big men with whom to talk. The situation was one which called for the utmost tact, shrewdness, and patience, combined with the sort of enthusiasm which not only awakens interest, but ear- ries conviction, as well. When the railroad hopes of later days are recalled, and when it is remembered how much less the friends of San Diego had to offer in 1879 in comparison with their present claims upon the attention of railroad builders, no one can fail to appreciate the size of the task which Mr. Kimball undertook. On September 5, 1879, he telegraphed E. W. Morse as follows : "All right; leave tonight. Be ready to aet on arrival."
He had succeeded in getting a contract which provided for the building of a railroad within eight months forty miles "east- ward from San Diego." He had agreed to raise $10,000 in eash to pay for the right of way, to give 10,000 acres of land from the National Rancho, to get as much additional subsidy as pos- sible, and to telegraph definitely what could be done by the people of San Diego and National City within twelve days of his arrival home. The details of this first subsidy are of no real interest, since it was never paid, owing to a radical change in the policy of the Santa Fé. It is important to note, however, that the expectation at that time was that the road would be built directly east to the Colorado River, and that surveys were actually begun to that end.
394
HISTORY OF SAN DIEGO
This preliminary work gained added importance from the presence of three representatives of the railroad, who arrived October 8, 1879. They were George B. Wilbur and Lucius G. Pratt, and W. R. Morley, chief engineer. These gentlemen re- mained in San Diego six weeks, making a thorough investigation. In their work of obtaining exact information about everything pertaining to the railroad and its prospects of business, their chief reliance appears to have been E. W. Morse, who worked indefatigably. Mr. Morse was a very modest man, and claimed no credit for himself, but it is the universal testimony that he rendered services of the utmost valne.
The favorable report of Messrs. Wilbur and Pratt was quickly followed by the beginning of actual work on the part of the company's engineers. It looked as if the last obstacle had been successfully passed, but such was not the case. Within two months all work was stopped by peremptory orders from Bos- ton. A fateful change of policy had been determined upon without consulting the people of San Diego. Instead of build- ing by the Southern route, the Santa Fe had suddenly decided to join hands with the Atlantic & Pacific in order to share in its great land subsidy, and to this end it would cross the Colo- rado River at the Needles. The question then arose as to whether San Francisco, rather than San Diego, should not be the terminus of the road. At any rate, it was decided to build to the Needles first, and to consider extensions later.
Naturally, San Diego was plunged in the deepest gloom. Times were hard, money scarce, and prospects dubious in every direction. Still, the members of the railroad committee, having been so near the realization of their hopes, were not inclined to give up. They wanted Mr. Kimball to make another trip to Boston and endeavor to renew the contract with the Santa Fé, even if the road must come by way of the Needles. John G. Capron was especially insistent, and it was finally arranged that $1,000 should be borrowed at a local bank to pay the expenses of the trip. A note for this amount was signed by Frank A. Kimball, John G. Capron, E. W. Morse, J. S. Gordon, E. Steele. James McCoy, O. S. Witherby. A. Overbaugh, J. A. Fairchild, and J. Russ & Company. Thus Mr. Kimball went back to Bos- ton. He says he was not cordially received by President Nick- erson. but finally succeeded in getting an audience with the directors. He further relates :
I went over the whole ground with them. I offered to re- new our subsidy of 10,000 acres of land. They said they wanted to organize a syndicate to handle the land. I said I would put in 6000 acres of land as a nucleus for the Land & Town Company, and 10,000 acres to the railroad, and that they
.
.
FRANK A. KIMBALL
The man to whose efforts and generosity San Diego is chiefly indebted for the construction of the Santa Fe railroad to this port. His brother, Warren C. Kimball, shares with him the honor of making the largest contribution to the railroad subsidy and also of founding National City
396
HISTORY OF SAN DIEGO
could then sell the railroad land to the Land & Town Com- pany, in accordance with the suggestion of Mr. Frank Pea- body. In addition to the land to be given by my brother and myself, I told them I thought I could raise a land sub- sidy of 10,000 acres. Thus we (the Kimballs) gave 16,000 acres. Then we sold them 9000 acres for $100,000 in cash. I told them we owed more than $60,000 and asked them where my brother and I would come in. Their answer was that they would give us one-sixth interest in all they owned (the sub- sidy) and this we accepted.
He succeeded in organizing a syndicate of the officers and directors of the Santa Fé system, consisting of: Thomas Nick- erson, the president of the company; Kidder, Peabody & Com- pany ; George B. Wilbur, B. P. Cheney, and Lucius G. Pratt, the gentlemen being directors of the Santa Fé. The provisions of the public contract were similar to the former one, except that the road was to be run by way of Colton and form a con- nection with the Atlantic & Pacific.
Mr. Kimball's contract provided for the establishment of the grand terminal of the railroad at National City. This was not known to the people of San Diego at the time. The terms of the subsidy merely provided that the terminal should be "on the Bay of San Diego," and it was expected that the railroad authorities would select whatever spot they deemed best suited to their purpose. As National City was a very heavy contrib- utor to the subsidy, it certainly had the same right to consider- ation as San Diego, but since the terms of the agreement were not generally understood to discriminate between the two loca- tions it is not strange that Mr. Kimball was sharply criticised by San Diego subscribers. On Mr. Kimball's return from his second successful trip to Boston, the railroad committee appealed to the public for subscriptions. Their work was phenomenally successful. They raised a subsidy in cash, notes and land as follows :
Acres
Lots
Allison, Jos. A. and J. M. $ 300
Arnold, C. M.
50
Aylworth, E.
65
Backesto, Dr. J. P.
100
Bank of San Diego
1000
Barnes, G. W.
50
1
Bass, John D.
50
Baugh, W. A.
100
Begole, W. A.
50
1
Bemis, Marco
25
Bennett, T.
10
Benton, W. W.
25
Bernard, Charles
50
Bidwell, James
50
Birdsall, J. D
250
CONTRIBUTORS TO SANTA FE FUND
397
Acres
Lots
Bowers, W. W
200
Bowers, M.
30
Boyd, J. B.
100
Bradt & Sons.
50
Bratton, S. H.
50
Britton, W. & L.
65
Brown, H. H
50
Brown, J. R.
100
Buell, E. J.
50
Callaghan, John
100
Campbell, B. P.
100
Campbell, J. N
100
Cantlin, Martin
50
Capron, John G
750
Carroll, F. M
100
Carver, J. J.
36
Cassidy, Andrew
50
Castle, F. A. and A. Klauber
50
Cave, D.
10
Chase, Chas. A.
75
Chase, A. J ..
10
Christensen, J. P
50
Choate, D.
400
Church, C. C.
25
Clark, George T.
50
Clark, John
25
Clark, M. L.
1
Cleveland, Daniel
27
Cohn, J. A.
50
Cole, A. A.
55
1
Commercial Bank
46
Conklin, N. H.
23
Cook, Henry
50
Corbett, Elizabeth
100
Cowles, Alfred
2
Cowles, F. H.
20
Coyne, Joseph
100
Crowell, Mrs. F. M.
25
Culver, C. B. .
100
Dannals, Geo. M
50
Desmond, John
1
Dievendorff, C. A.
200
Dobler, C.
150
Dodge, Rev. R. V
400
Dougherty, H. H.
25
Downey, John G.
2
Doyle, John T.
20
Dranga, N. G. O.
100
Dunham, Mrs. C.
1
Dunn, W. B.
20
Eaton, A. N. and E. D.
20
Emory, Gen. Wm. H.
13
Evans, A. E.
40
Fairchild, .J. A.
200
398
HISTORY OF SAN DIEGO
Acres
Lots
Faivre Joseph
10
Farrell, Thomas
25
Felsenheld, David
12
Fenn, Dr. C. M.
100
Fischer, John
100
Folger & Schuman
1
Forster, John
250
Forster, M. A
100
Fox, C. J.
100
Francisco, C. F
100
Frisbie, J. C.
40
Frisbie, J. O.
200
Gassen, A. G.
300
Geddes, George
20
Gerichten, C. P.
250
40
Ginn, Mrs. Mary S
250
6
Gordon & Hazzard
500
Gordon & Hazzard, Morse & Steele ..
80
Goss, Thomas
230
Gruendike, Jacob
500
Guiou, D.
100
Gunn, Douglas
100
40
Hall, E. B.
100
Hamilton, Chas. S.
509
Hamilton, Fred M
100
Hamilton, M. D.
150
Hammer, M. B.
80
Hanke, Carl T.
50
Harbison, J. S.
150
1
Hatleberg, J. O.
34
Henarie, D. V. B
250
Hendrick, E. W
25
Herman, D. C.
250
Herrander, John
50
Hicks, John J.
100
Higgins, H. M.
40
High, John E.
80
High, William E
80
Hinchman, A. F
48
Hinton, J. B.
160
Hitchcock, G. N
100
Hoffman, John C 25
100
Holm, Julius
50
Horton, A. E.
250
Howard, Bryant
500
Hubbell, Charles
30
Hyde, George
600
20
Ihlstrom, L. J.
100
Johnson, Robert
1
Jones, E. L.
50
Jones, S. P
300
Jones, T. S.
300
Jorres, William
100
Hollister, D. A
CONTRIBUTORS TO SANTA FE FUND
Acres Lots
Josse, L. M.
50
Journeay, George
150
Julian, A. H.
75
Julian J. M.
100
Kelly, Robert
150
20
Kimball Bros.
10,000
Knowles, A. P.
100
Knowles, Anna Scheper
100
Koster, P.
300
Lankershim, I.
42.3
Larson & Wescott
400
Leach, Wallace
200
Lehman, Theodore
100
Levi, S. .
100
1
Littlefield, Sheldon
100
Littlefield, S. and E. Stanwood.
6
Llewellyn, William
20
Lockling, L. L.
1
Louis, Isidor
1
Lowell, Fred B.
50
Luce, M. A.
100
100
Mabury, H. and W.
12
Mannasse and Schiller
1
Marston, George W
300
Marston, Harriet
12
Maxcy, A. E.
150
May, Chas. E.
50
McCarthy, M. J.
50
McClain, J. W.
25
McCool, W.
20
McCoy, James
250
40
McDonald, G. W. B.
80
McIntosh, F.
2
McRae, Daniel
100
Menke, A.
25
Minear, W. L.
50
Morrow, Richard
5
Morse, E. W
750
Mumford, J. V
50
Neale, George
50
Noell, Chas. P
18
Norris, W. B.
50
Nottage, E. W.
25
O'Leary, Edmund 25
Overbaugh, A. 500
12
Owens, Edward .
15
Page, Mrs. A. C.
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.