History of Santa Clara County, California, with biographical sketches of the leading men and women of the county who have been identified with its growth and development from the early days to the present, Part 9

Author: Sawyer, Eugene Taylor, 1846-
Publication date: 1922
Publisher: Los Angeles : Historic Record Co.
Number of Pages: 1928

USA > California > Santa Clara County > History of Santa Clara County, California, with biographical sketches of the leading men and women of the county who have been identified with its growth and development from the early days to the present > Part 9

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).

The question of the legality of the removal was brought up in 1854 before the Supreme Court, when a majority of the justices, Hey- denfeldt and Wells, held that according to law San Jose was the capital of the state. Thereupon the following order was made:

"It is ordered that the sheriff of Santa Clara County procure in the town of San Jose and properly arrange and furnish a court- room, clerk's office and consultation room, for the use of the court. It is further ordered that the clerk of this court forthwith remove the records of this court to the town of San Jose. It is further ordered that the court will meet to deliver opinions at San Jose. on the Ist Monday in April, and on that day will appoint some future day of the term for the argument of cases.

"HEYDENFELDT. J. "\'ELLS, J. "Attest : D. K. Woodside, Clerk."

A writ of mandamus on the strength of the foregoing was issued from the Third District Court against all the state officers, command- ing that they remove their offices to San Jose or show cause why they should not do so. The argument was heard and the theory maintained that San Jose was the proper capital of the state. An appeal was taken to the Supreme Court. In the meantime Justice Wells had died, his place being filled by Jus- tice Bryant. In the appeal the Supreme Court decided that San Jose was not the state cap- ital, from which decision Justice Heydenfeldt dissented.

The first Legislature passed an act that gave San Jose its first legal incorporation un- der United States rule. The act was passed in March, 1850, and on April 11 the Ayunta- miento held its last meeting. The new com- mon council held its first meeting under the charter on the 13th.

First July 4th Celebration

The anniversary of American Independence was patriotically remembered in the first year of civil administration in California. San Jose held a grand celebration and much more in- terest was felt than on such occasions in the eastern states. Fred Hall, in his history, says: "The isolation from the other states made the feeling of national pride increase. We felt as though we were in a foreign land and the tendency was to vivify and brighten the love of the whole country in every American. On that occasion the Hon. William Voorhies de- livered the oration : James M. Jones also deliv- ered one in Spanish for the benefit of the Mexicans present. Mr. Sanford, a lawyer from Georgia, read the Declaration of Inde- pendence. Thirteen young ladies dressed in blue spencers and white skirts rode on horse- back, followed by the Eagle Guards, com- manded by Capt. Thomas White; also 500 citizens, some on horseback, some in carriages and some afoot, made up the national pageant that wound its way to the south of town, a mile or more, in the grove near the Alinaden road ;. and there the ceremony was performed to the great pleasure and pride of the Ameri- can settlers in the new country."

Boundaries of Santa Clara County

While the Legislature was in session in San Jose the boundaries of Santa Clara County were defined. The county originally included the township of Washington, of Alameda County, but this was ent off and the county reduced to its present limits, as follows: Be- ginning at a point opposite the mouth of the San Francisquito, being the common corner of Alameda. San Mateo and Santa Clara coun- ties : thence easterly to a point at the head of a slough which is an arm of San Francisco Bay at its head, making into the mainland in front of the Gegara rancho; thence easterly to a lone sycamore tree that stands in a ravine between the dwellings of Flujencia and Valen- tine Gegara; thence easterly up said ravine to the top of the mountains as surveyed by Horace A. Higley ; thence in a direct line east- erly to the common corner of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Alameda and Santa Clara counties on the summit of the Coast Range: thence southeasterly, following the summit of the Coast Range to the northeast corner of Mon- terey County; thence westerly, following the northern boundary of Monterey County to the southeast corner of Santa Cruz County ; thence northwesterly, following the summit of the Santa Cruz Mountains to the head of San Francisquito Creek; thence down said creek to its mouth ; thence in a direct line to the

HISTORY OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY

place of beginning. Containing about 1,300 square miles.

The county government was first adminis- tered by the court of sessions, which held jurisdiction until 1852, when the board of su- pervisors was created. In 1854 the govern- inent again went into the hands of the court of sessions, where it remained until the next year, when the board of supervisors was re- vived to administer the affairs of the county ever since. Following is a list of those who have administered the county . government from the date of organization to the present time :

On the 1st day of June, 1850, the court of sessions was organized with J. W. Redman president, and Caswell Davis and H. C. Smith associate justices.

July 5, 1850-J. W. Redman, president ; John Gilroy. Caswell Davis, associates.

August 18. 1850-J. W. Redman, president ; Charles Clayton and Caswell Davis, associates.

October 6, 1851-J. W. Redman, president ; R. B. Buckner and Marcus Williams, asso- ciates

December, 1851-J. W. Redman, president ; Cyrus G. Sanders and Marcus Williams, as- sociates.

May 14, 1852-J. W. Redman, president ; Peleg Rush and Cyrus G. Sanders, associates. An election for supervisors was held June 3, 1852, and the new board was organized as follows: Isaac N. Senter, chairman; Fred E. Whitney, William E. Taylor, Jacob Gruwell. associates.

December 6, 1852-L. H. Bascom, chairman ; John B. Allen, A. M. Church, Levi Goodrich, Joseph C. Boyd, associates.

September 7, 1853-George Peck, chairman ; Daniel Murphy, R. G. Moody, William Dan- iels, W. Gallimore, associates.

In April, 1854, the court of sessions again took charge. It was composed as follows: R. B. Buckner, president ; Caswell Davis, Thomas Vermuele, associates.

October 1, 1854 R. B. Buckner, president ; Caswell Davis, C. G. Thomas, associates.

On April 9, 1855, another board of super- visors was elected. The organization of the board from that time has been as follows: April 1, 1855 to November, 1855-Samuel Henderson, W. R. Bassham, Daniel Murphy.

November, 1855, to November, 1856-W. R. Bassham, W. R. Bane, Samuel Morrison.

November, 1856, to October, 1857 -- Cary Peebels, China Smith, D. R. Douglas.

October, 1857, to October, 1858-Joseph H. Kincaid, Samuel A. Ballard, Albert Warthen.

October, 1858, to November, 1859-John M. Swinford, H. D. Coon, Eli Jones; Isaac Bran- ham served vice Jones.

November, 1859, to December, 1860-H. D. Coon, H. J. Bradley, Isaac Branham.

December, 1860, to October, 1861-H. J. Bradley, W. M. Williamson, H. D. Coon.

October, 1861, to November, 1862-H. J. Bradley, W. M. Williamson, J. H. Adams.

November, 1862, to March, 1864-W. M. Williamson, J. H. Adams, S. S. Johnson.

March, 1864, to March, 1866-John A. Quinby, Chapman Yates, L. Robinson, J. A. Perkins, Frank Sleeper.

March, 1866, to March, 1868-John A. Quinby, Frank Sleeper, John A. Perkins, J. Q. A. Ballou, Frank Cook.

March, 1868, to March, 1870-David Camp- bell, John Cook, William H. Hall, W. H. Patton, Oliver Cottle. (Cottle served vice Ballou, who resigned.)

March, 1870, to March, 1872-David Camp- bell, W. H. Hall, W. H. Patton, J. M. Battee, Samuel 1. Jamison.

March, 1872, to March, 1874-J. M. Battee, William Paul. W. N. Furlong, S. 1. Jamison, J. W. Boulware.

March, 1874, to March, 1876-J. M. Battee, W. N. Furlong, J. W. Boulware, Alfred Chew, William Paul, A. King, H. M. Leonard.

March, 1876, to March 1878-S. F. Ayer, W. H. Rogers, J. M. Battee, Alfred Chew, W. N. Furlong, A. King, H. M. Leonard.

March, 1878, to March, 1880-S. F. Ayer, W. H. Rogers, W. N. Furlong, John Weathers, J. H. M. Townsend, M. D. Kell, H. M. Leon- ard. (Townsend resigned in December, 1879, and was succeeded by James Snow.)

March, 1880, to February, 1883-S. F. Ayer, John Weathers, James Snow, M. D. Kell, H. M. Leonard, H. H. Main, Samuel Rea.

February, 1883-1885-W. E. Ward, H. Til- lotson, W. O. Watson, H. McCleary, Peter Donnelly, H. H. Main, S. A. Blythe.

March, 1885, to March, 1887-S. F. Ayer, \V. A. Z. Edwards. A. Greeninger, W. O. Watson, Peter Donnelly.

March, 1887, to March, 1891-S. F. Ayer, I. A. Z. Edwards, A. Greeninger, W. O. Watson, James Phegley.

1891-1895-P. Donnelly, A. Greeninger, W. A. Z. Edwards, J. S. Whitehurst, William Erkson, S. F. Ayer.

1895-1897 -- A. Greeninger, George E. Rea, J. S. Selby, John Roll, S. F. Aver.

1897-1899-Geo. E. Rea, Paul P. Austin, F. M. Stern, John Roll, S. F. Ayer.

1899-1904-F. W. Knowles, Geo. E. Rea, F. L. Cottle, John Roll, S. F. Ayer.

1904-1907-F. E. Mitchell, Ayer, Roll, Rea and A. L. Hubbard.

1907-1911-H. S. Hersman, H. M. Ayer, A. L. Hubbard, John Roll, F. E. Mitchell.

HISTORY OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY

From the last named date the following have held office continuously: Henry Hecker, A. L. Hubbard, H. M. Ayer, F. E. Mitchell, John Roll.

Settling Titles of Land Grants

At the time of the cession of California there was probably not a perfect title in the whole territory of Alta California. Under the terms of the treaty, however, the holders of these incomplete titles were to be permitted to go on and complete them under the laws of the United States. After the acquisition of Cali- fornia and after ascertaining the inchoate con- dition of the land grants and the importance of having them segregated from the public domain, and for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, an act was passed by the Congress of the United States on March 3, 1851, pro- viding for commissioners to be appointed by the President for the purpose of ascertaining and settling private land grants in California, with a right of appeal, by either the govern- ment or the claimant, to the U. S. District Court for the State of California, or to the U. S. Supreme Court. To this commission all claimants were required to present their petitions for the confirmation of their claims. Failure to so present them within a specified time after the passage of the act worked a forfeiture of the claim, which was afterward treated as a part of the public domain. Upon the confirmation of these claims surveys were made by the surveyor general and patents issued thereon.

Those lands which had not been granted by the Mexican Government were subject to the laws of the United States governing the dis- position of the public domain. Besides these two classes of land there was a third-the land granted to pueblos.

Under the plan of Tepic, Mexico, on the formation of each new pueblo in the New World, it was entitled, for its own use, for building purposes and for cultivation and pas- turage, to a square of land extending one league in each direction from the center of the plaza, making in all four square leagues. Where the topography of the country, either by reason of the juxtaposition of the sea or of mountain barriers, prevented the land be- ing taken in the form of a square, the four leagues were taken in some other form so as to include the pueblo.

On the settlement of the pueblo of San Jose, the Mission of Santa Clara having been es- tablished to the west, the Mission of San Jose to the north and east, and the Mission of San Juan to the south, it became necessary to designate the boundaries so that the jurisdic- 5

tion of the pueblo and the adjoining Missions should not conflict. From year to year the old inhabitants of the pueblo, in company with the younger persons in the community, were accustomed to go out and visit the monu- ments erected to designate these lines, and to cast additional stones upon them to keep them intact. The delimiting line between the pueblo and the Mission of San Jose ran from the mountains to the bay, about midway be- tween Warm Springs and the present town of Milpitas. On the west the Guadalupe River was fixed as the boundary, while the line be- tween the pueblo and the Mission of San Juan was fixed across the valley to the south in the vicinity of Las Llagas Creek.

San Jose Land Company

San Jose, before the admission of California to the Union, was one of the few populous settlements in California and was known at the time, and before, as the "Upper Pueblo." The city becoming involved and unable to pay the debt incurred to provide suitable accom- modations for the Legislature and the officers of the state, a judgment was obtained against her and her creditors. An execution was is- sued on the judgment and all the pueblo lands were sold at sheriff's sale and bought in by a syndicate styling itself the "San Jose Land Company." This syndicate soon became known locally as "The Forty Thieves," al- though the number of its members was less than forty and they were, by no means, thieves. But the title they claimed under became pop- ularly known as the "Forty Thieves Title."

The San Jose Land Company, after acquir- ing its sheriff's deed to lands belonging to the city, claiming to be the successor in in- terest to the pueblo, presented its claim to the United States Land Commission, sitting in San Francisco, praying for confirmation to it of the lands contained within the estab- lished boundaries, asserting that there had been a concession by the Spanish Crown of that large tract to the pueblo. A mass of documentary evidence, correspondence, etc., was introduced, also the testimony of wit- nessee to the fact that the monuments had been placed there years before and had been recognized by the citizens. Although no formal concession or grant had ever been found or produced, it was asserted that those acts indicated that one had actually been made. The board and the U. S. District Court confirmed the grant to these exterior boun- daries.

In the meantime settlers had located on lands included in this tract under the impres- sion that they belonged either to the Govern- ment or to private parties from whom they

HISTORY OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY

had purchased. They had made improvements and established homes. By this decision ex- tending the limits of the pueblo, their prop- erty was absorbed, and they united, some four- teen of them, in securing an appeal to the Supreme Court.

At that time there was in existence a body known as the commissioners of the funded debt of the City of San Jose. Judge F. E. Spencer, who was a member of this board, was anxious to have the decision of the Dis- trict Court sustained, believing that the land company had no valid claim, and that if the title to this large tract was confirmed to the city it could be maintained. He succeeded in effecting a compromise, by which the Su- preme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court, except as to the tracts claimed by the fourteen settlers. A final decree to this effect was made. Afterward this body of land was sold in tracts to actual settlers at the price fixed by the United States Government for its public lands. With the proceeds of these sales the debt of the City of San Jose was extin- guished and up to 1887 the city had no debt whatever. In due time the pueblo was sur- veyed and in 1884 a patent was issued.

The claim of the City Land Company was the subject of more or less litigation and trouble from time to time until 1869. It came up in the case of Branham et al. vs. the City of San Jose, where it was held by the Supreme Court that the city's lands were not subject to execution and sale under a judgment against her. A number of years later, upon the adop- tion of a charter by the city, a clause was inserted which, it was claimed, confirmed the land company's title. Upon that claim an ac- tion was brought in the United States Circuit Court for the District of California to recover possession of the large body of land within the corporate limits which had not passed by legal grants. The case was Leroy vs. Chaboya et al., some 600 defendants being named, and involving the title to a very large portion of land within the city limits. F. E. Spencer, who was counsel for the defendants, obtained a ruling from the District Court to the effect that the provisions of the charter referred to did not amount to a confirmation in favor of the land company or its successor, thus end- ing a case of great importance to the city and surrounding territory, and which went far to settle land titles in the vicinity.

Grants, of rather an indefinite character, were claimed to have been made to the vari- ous Missions, both in Northern and Southern California. When the Missions were secular- ized, these grants reverted to the state. Not- withstanding this act of secularization, several of the Missions retained more or less landed

property, such as church edifices, orchards, etc., and these, in most instances, were after- wards confirmed to the church. But a large body of grazing land passed into the general domain and was re-granted to private indi- viduals. There was quite an extended legal warfare before these lands were confirmed to the church. It was claimed that when the Missions were secularized all property re- verted to the Mexican Government, and as it had never been re-granted it became the public domain of the United States on the cession of California, and was therefore subject to pre- emption. The orchard property at Santa Clara was particularly valuable and was settled upon by several sets of squatters. J. W. Redman, county judge for several years, hield the orch- ard, selling the fruit at enormous prices. It went through several hands, but was finally confirmed to Archbishop Alemany, represent- ing the church.

While the Mexicans held California, Lieu- tenant Moraga, under the direction of the Spanish Government, partitioned to the orig- inal settlers the lands of the new pueblo of San Jose. The allotments were made in ac- cordance with a rule adopted by the govern- ment by which all pueblos or towns were to be laid out and established under the plan of the city of Tepic. The tracts of land were divided into three classes: solares, or building lots ; suertes, or lots for cultivation, and egidos, or lots for pasturage and wood. By the Tepic method, each family was given four suertes and one solar.

Though there is no record evidence that an allotment was made after the pueblo was moved from its first location, Judge Spencer said that in 1852, and even later, there re- mained landmarks that showed something of the general plan of the location. Among these were the stumps of hedge-rows forming alleys leading to the Guadalupe River-evidently roads used by women going to the creek to do their washing. At that time, and until the willows and other vegetation had disappeared, the Guadalupe was a perennial stream, sup- plied in the summer time from the springs in the lower ground south of town, while from the Guadalupe were the remains, tolerably defined, of ditches leading into Canoas Creek. This word "canoas." besides meaning "canal," also signifies a "trough," and it was probably for this latter meaning that the Mexicans ap- plied it to this stream, as they evidently used it for the purpose of conveying water to their suertes, or planting lands.

There were also the remains of branch ditches, or acequias. One went out and crossed the plaza near the site of the city hall and continued on, crossing First Street near San

HISTORY OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY

Fernando, as if to irrigate the land sloping to the north and east. Another one was a little west of Market Street, crossing Santa Clara Street diagonally, going through the grounds now occupied by the Sisters of Notre Dame and continuing to the present site of the Hotel Vendome. From this was irrigated the lands between it and the Guadalupe River. In one of the suits regarding the land claimed as stiertes, old Pedro Chaboya and other old Mex- ican witnesses testified that all the alkali land in the northeast portion of the city was, in very early days, fine land for crops; but the Coyote Creek having overflowed its banks and rushed down across the country, the top-soil was washed off and when the water receded it was converted into an alkali sink.

With the Americans came land speculators, and as the pueblo grew in importance and its lands in value, suits were started to obtain possession of some of the most valuable por- tions of the city under suerte title. None of them, however, were successful, but they formed a chapter of the most important and sharpest litigation in the history of the county. There being no record of the original allot- ment of suertes, their existence could be proved only by parol testimony, and for this purpose the "oldest inhabitant" was in constant de- mand. There stood a few old landmarks with all the dignity due to their antiquity, but neither these nor the imperfect family tradi- tions of the oldest poblanos were sufficient to warrant a judgment in favor of the claimants.

The methods used by the Americans to measure and mark out the boundaries of their grants were very crude and resulted in much inaccuracy. Many of them, when surveyed by the United States, shrank or expanded in dimension to the extent of many hundreds of acres. Persons who had settled on what was thought to be Government land would, after some years of labor, find their property in- cluded within the boundaries of a neighboring grant and would be forced to lose their homes or purchase them again of another owner. Some persons were compelled to purchase their farms several times before their title be- came assured. This state of affairs caused great dissatisfaction among the settlers and societies were formed to meet adverse claims and prevent eviction.

These societies, though very determined in the expression of their rights, generally avoided violent measures. In fact, with one exception, they confined their efforts to the raising of funds for the purpose of defending their claims in the courts. The exception re- ferred to occurred in 1861 and is thus recorded by Frederic Hall: "The greatest excitement and demonstration that was ever exhibited in

this county upon the question of land titles took place this year. The grant of Antonio Chabolla for the tract of land known as the Yerba Buena Rancho, lying east or southeast of town, had been confirmed to the claimants thereof under the Chabolla title by the United States courts. There were many settlers on the land, some of whom had occupied the same for quite a lengthy period under the belief that it was public land. They seemed to be of the opinion that the grant was a fraudulent one, . notwithstanding the fact that the land had been patented by the United States in accord- ance with the decree of confirmation. The advice which had been given the settlers was evidently not of that kind which had a tend- ency to better them, or to cause them to view the matter in a proper light. They were in- duced to spend money in the way of lawyers' fees that was as useless as throwing money into the sea. The Government had conveyed, in fee simple, the land to the claimants, and no party but the United States could move to set aside that patent upon the ground of fraud or any other ground. Suits in ejectment had been instituted against some of the settlers on said land and judgment rendered against them for the possession of certain tracts by the Third Judicial Court, in and for the County of Santa Clara. William Matthews, Esq., of counsel for plaintiff in those cases, caused writs of execution for possession to be issued to the sheriff that the plaintiff might have pos- session in accordance with his judgments.

"The sheriff summoned a posse of 600 men to go with and to aid him in executing the writ. When the posse assembled at the Court House they were asked if they were armed, to which they replied in the negative; then being asked if they would arm themselves, likewise replied in the negative. They were then dismissed. About one o'clock in the afternoon about a thousand settlers paraded through the town, some on horses, some in wagons, some on foot, and nearly all armed. They had one small cannon. All the settlers' leagues of the county and some from adjoin- ing counties were said to have been present. Toward the close of day they went to their respective homes without doing any damage, save that of disobeying the writ.'

Until 1847 there had not been much certainty as to the location of, or titles to, lots in the pueblo of San Jose. It seems to have been taken for granted that the laws regulating the establishment of Mexican towns had been com- plied with and that those in possession had valid titles. Whether the title was good or not seemed to be of little consequence under the then existing condition of affairs. There were no regularly laid-out streets. The cen-

HISTORY OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY

ter of the town was the Juzgado, or the plaza, and the houses were scattered north and south on irregular lines with a roadway between. The roadway is now Market Street. After the defeat of Sanchez at the battle of Santa Clara, and the certainty that the arms of the United States would be victorious in Mexico, the for- eigners became impressed with the conviction that Alta California would be ceded to the victors and a permanent government estab- lished. Viewed in this light, the solares and suertes of the pueblo became of more impor- tance and an attempt was made to settle the question of their ownership.

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 Santa Clara County, California, with biographical sketches of the leading men and women of the county who have been identified with its growth and development from the early days to the present, Part 9

Author: Sawyer, Eugene Taylor, 1846- Publication date: 1922 Publisher: Los Angeles : Historic Record Co. Number of Pages: 1928

Author: Sawyer, Eugene Taylor, 1846-
Publication date: 1922
Publisher: Los Angeles : Historic Record Co.
Number of Pages: 1928