USA > California > Sonoma County > History of Sonoma County : including its geology, topography, mountains, valleys, and streams > Part 17
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 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84
We have elsewhere mentioned the establishment of the Court of Sessions; they held their first meeting in the county in 1850, the court being composed of A. A. Green, who was County Judge, and Charles Hudspeth and Peter Campbell, Associates. In 1851 Judge Green died, when Martin E. Cook was appointed, but he declining to serve, W. O. King was chosen to fill the office, and he held one term of court.
143
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
On September 3, 1851, the first gubernatorial election was held under the new order of things. In this contest, John Bigler, who received twenty-three thousand seven hundred and seventy-four votes in the State, against twenty- two thousand seven hundred and thirty-three, got by P. B. Redding, his Whig opponent, had the assistance of that new power which had commenced to creep into the State, in the shape of the squatting element. He was demo- cratie in his manners, being "hale-fellow" with all. Not so his oppo- nent, who was a gentleman of more genteel bearing than the kind-hearted, unambitious, landless Governor, who was always mindful of his friends. Bigler, in all his messages, urged economy, but found it difficult to prevent an office being made for a friend. Tuthill remarks : " It was his pet project to unite the Southern and Western men of his party, and let the free-soilers shift for themselves; but it is not in that direction that party cleavage runs. The Southerners scorned the alliance. They were 'high-toned,' and looked down upon a Missourian, as little better than a man from Massachusetts. The Governor's project would not work. He carried water on both shoulders and spilt very little on either side."
In November, 1851, the Hon. C. P. Wilkins succeeded Judge Green in the position of County Judge; Israel Brockman was Sheriff, and Dr. John Hendley, County Clerk and Recorder. In 1852, on July 8th, we find the first record of proceedings of the Court of Session extant among the county archives, when the Judge, C. P. Wilkins, and his associates, Peter Campbell and J. M. Miller, were present, with J. Hendley, Clerk, and J. A. Reynolds, Under Sheriff, assembled to impanel a Grand Jury. These were: W. D. Kent, J. D. George, Alexander Speet, Samuel Havens, H. N. Ryder, Josiah Wilkins, James Crenshaw, J. P. Thrasher, A. C. Hollingshead, J. W. Davis, George Smith, Arnold Hutton, Edward Beasley, George Edgerton, John Smith, Benjamin Mitchell, H. L. Kamp, J. M. Gilliland, Robert Anderson, George B. Farrar, Hosea Norris, and Leonard Dodge. On October 3d, Phil. R. Thompson and A. C. Godwin were appointed Associate Justices, in place of the two gentlemen mentioned above, whose terms had expired.
The first Board of Supervisors for the county met at Sonoma on July 5, 1852, and took charge of those affairs not coming within the immediate duties of the Court of Sessions. The members were D. O. Shattuck, who was called upon to fill the distinguished position of Chairman, William A. Hereford of Santa Rosa district, Leonard P. Hanson, and James Singley. At the Presiden- tial election in the Fall of this year, E. W. Mckinstry was elected District Judge; J. M. Hudspeth, Senator; H. S. Ewing and James McKamy, Assemblymen.
In the year 1853, we find that the late General Joe Hooker, then a resident of Sonoma, was elected to the post of Road Overseer, and that Washington township was created and a polling precinct- established at the store of A. C. Goodwin, which occupied a position on the site of the present town of Gey-
144
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
serville. The Democratic Convention met this year at Santa Rosa, and nom- inated Joe Hooker and Lindsay Carson for the Assembly, and a full county ticket. The Settlers' Convention, met on August 6th and nominated a full county ticket, headed by James N. Bennett and Judge Robert Hopkins for the Assembly. When the election day arrived, September 7th, - Carson was elected to the Legislature and Bennett and Hooker were equal. The remo- val of the county seat from Sonoma to Santa Rosa did not enter largely into the first contest though such a change was openly discussed; in the second heat the election of either Bennett or Hooker hinged directly on the issue. The election came off on October 29th, and Bennett, who lived in and was sponser for Bennett valley, beat Hooker, a resident of Sonoma, by thirteen votes. Lindsay Carson resigned before the meeting of the Legislature, therefore another special election was had which resulted in the return, on the 23d, December of W. B. Hagans, who was opposed by James Singley and Joseph W. Belden.
The story of the removal of the county seat, will be found fully set forth in the history of Santa Rosa township. From that date onwards the county progressed in every branch of public interest.
The first full record of election which we have been able to find in the county archives was that held in the month of November, 1856, and is as follows :-
For Presidential Electors, A. C. Bradford, 1519 votes; For member of Con- gress, Charles L. Scott, 1456 votes; For Clerk of Supreme Court, C. S. Fair- fax, 1481 votes; For State Superintendent of Public Instruction, J. J. Mol- der, 1481 votes ; For Prison Director, Moses Arms, 330 votes; For Senator, A. W. Talieferro, 1088 votes; For members of Assembly, Uriah Edwards, 1357 votes, and Richard Harrison, 1152 votes: For County Superintendent of Public Instruction, Edward Fisher, 1134 votes; For County Assessor, S. D. Towne, 1106 votes; Amendments to Constitution-Yes, 169; No; 0.
While on the subject of votes, let us here produce, as a matter of curiosity the vote taken in regard to the proposed railroad on May 9, 1868: Clover- dale to Marin county, 2092; Cloverdale to Vallejo, Solano county, 1589: Donahue, Yes, 3166; Donahue, No, 429; Cloverdale to Petaluma, 3.
In conclusion of this portion of our work we now come to the greatest political act of late years, namely, the order for a new Constitution and its passage by an immense majority throughout the State.
It was found that the provisions in regard to taxation and property were of too vague a nature to be allowed to hold at this period of progress. At the time when the old constitution was framed in Monterey, it was never con- templated that the State would be ever anything but a purely mining coun- try; and as each mining section had its own local laws, more distinct terms in regard to what was legally meant by property and taxable property, were not thought to be necessary. At last the day came when a decision of the
...
James & Fowler ames
145
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Supreme Court ruled that credits are not property in the sense in which the word property is used in Section 13 of Article XI of the Constitution, and, cannot be assessed for taxes, or taxed as property, even if secured by mort- gage. (The People vs. Hibernian Bank, Cal. Reports, 51).
The popular voice became clamorous on this decision for a change of rule; and though having been before mooted, and successfully balked by former sessions of the Legislature, an Act to provide for a convention to frame a new Constitution for the State of California was approved March 30, 1878; and by a proclamation of the Governor an election throughout the county of Sonoma was ordered to be held on June 19, 1878, for the purpose of electing delegates to a Constitutional Convention, to meet at Sacramento on September 28th. Thirty-two delegates were to be elected by the State at large, of whom not more than eight should be residents of any one Congressional district. The Conven- tion duly met at the State capital, and after much labor framed the new Constitution. The election for the adoption or rejection caused a deep- seated feeling throughout the length and breadth of our land, and for months the country was in a perfect ferment; at last the 7th of May arrived; the following morning the news was flashed from west to east and north to south of the adoption of California's new organic law. Under its provisions the new order of officers were elected on "September 4, 1879, and now nothing but time can solve the riddle as to its working.
10
146
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
THE MEXICAN LAND GRANTS OF SONOMA COUNTY ..
RANCHOS MUSALACON-COTATE-GUILICOS-CANADA DE POGOLOME-LLANO DE SANTA ROSA- EL MOLINO-HUICHICA-YULUPA-GUENOC-SOTOYOME-BODEGA -BLUCHER -CALLAYOMI- MUNIZ- LAGUNA DE SAN ANTONIO-ARROYO DE SAN ANTONIO-SENO DE MALACOMES-ROBLAR DE LA MISERIA-CANADA DE LA JONIVE-ESTERO AMERICANO-GERMAN-PETALUMA-SAN MIGUEL TZABACO-CASLAMAYOME-CABEZA DE SANTA ROSA-AGUA CALIENTE-FOUNDING OF SPANISH MISSIONS.
In glancing at the heading of this chapter we must ask the reader not to indulge in the vain hope that a full history of the grants comprised within the limits of what is now known as Sonoma county will be found; such, indeed, would be beyond the limits of this work even had we at hand the infinity of resourses to be found in the hundreds of cases which have arisen out of them. Our compilation must of necessity be accepted in its crude state. We have striven to our utmost capability to produce some informa- tion which would combine both usefulness and correctness, and to this end have relied chiefly on the information contained in a legal work on whose title- page is the legend: "Reports of Land Cases determined in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. June Term 1853 to June Term 1858 inclusive, by Ogden Hoffman, District Judge; San Fran- cisco; Numa Hubert, Publisher, 1862." This valuable work has been most. kindly and considerately placed at our disposal by Judge Jackson Temple of the Twenty-second Judicial District of California. The first case we find on page 78 of Vol. 1 :-
THE UNITED STATES, Apellants, vs. JOHNSON HORRELL, claiming the Run- cho Musalacon .- This was a claim for two leagues of land in Sonoma county, situated in Cloverdale township, confirmed by the Board of Commissioners, and appealed by the United States. The claimants in this case produced the original grant made by Governor Pio Pico to Francisco Berryesa on May 2, 1846. The record of the approval of the concession by the Departmental Assembly was dated June 3, 1846. No doubt is suggested as to the genuine- ness of any of these documents. The grantee appears within the year pre- scribed by the grant to have entered into possession of his land and to have resided in a wooden house built by him upon it. He also placed upon it cattle, and commenced its cultivation. There is no difficulty in identifying and locating the land by means of the description in the grant and the map to which it refers, and which is contained in the expediente. The Commis- sioners in their opinion on this case observe "that although the title was executed but a short time before the American occupation, it appears to have
147
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
been made in good faith and with due regard to the requirements of the law." The decision of the Board was affirmed and a decree entered accord- ingly. On page 80 of the Appendix we find: "Johnson Horrell et al., claimants for Rincon de Musalacon, two square leagues, in Mendocino and Sonoma counties, granted May 2, 1846, by Pio Pico to Francisco Berryesa; claim filed February 11, 1853, confirmed by the Commission December 12, 1854, by the District Court, January 14, 1856, and appeal dismissed April 2, 1857; containing 8,866.88 acres.
THE UNITED STATES, Apellants, vs THOMAS S. PAGE, claiming the Rancho Cotate .- This claim which was for four leagues of land in Sonoma county situated partly in Vallejo and partly in Santa Rosa townships, was confirmed by the Board, and appealed by the United States. In this case the original grant was not produced, but its existence and loss are proved beyond all reasonable doubt by the depositions of the witnesses and the production of the expediente from the archives containing the usual documents, and also a certificate of approval by the departmental assembly. The grant is also mentioned in the index of grants by the former government. No doubt was entertained by the commissioners as to the sufficiency of the proofs on these points, nor is any objection raised in the district court in regard to them. The evidence discloses a full compliance with the conditions, and the deserip- tion in the grant and map determines its locality. No objection is raised on the part of the appellants to the confirmation of this claim, and on look- ing over the transcript the court did not perceive any reason to doubt its entire validity. Page 48 of the Appendix tells us: " Thomas S. Page, claim- ant for Cotate, four square leagues in Sonoma county, granted July 7, 1844, by Manuel Micheltorena to Juan Castañeda; claim filed September 21, 1852, confirmed by the Commission August 27, 1854, by the District Court Jan- uary 14, 1856, and appeal dismissed March 21, 1857, containing ; 17,238.60 acres. Patented. "
THE UNITED STATES, Appellants, vs. JUAN WILSON, claiming the Rancho Guilicos .- " Claim for a tract of land, supposed to contain four leagues, in Sonoma county, situated in Santa Rosa and Sonoma Townships, confirmed by the Board, and appealed by the United States. The claim in this case was confirmed by the Board. No doubt is suggested as to the authenticity of the documentary evidence submitted, and the only point upon which a question was made was whether the grant and map accompanying it suffi- ciently indicate the granted land-there being no designation of the quantity or number of leagues in the original grant. The grant bears date Novem- ber 13, 1839, but was not issued until the 20th. The signature of the Gov- enor to the original grant is fully proved, and the expediente produced from the archives containing the proceedings upon the petition, the various orders of the Governor, and the decree of approval by the Departmental Assembly.
148
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
The requirements of the regulations of 1828 seem to have been substantially complied with, and the land cultivated and inhabited within reasonable time. With regard to locating the tract, there seems to be no difficulty. The grant describes it as the parcel of land known by the name of " Guilicos, " within the boundaries shown in the map which accompanies the petition. On inspecting the map, those boundaries appear to be indicated with tolerable certainty, and it is presumed that by means of it no practical difficulty- will be found by the surveyor in laying off to the claimant his lan 1. A decree of confirmation must therefore be entered." Page 5, of the Appendix says: " Juan Wilson, claimant for Guilicos, four square leagues, in Sonoma county, granted November 13, 1839, by Juan B. Alvara lo to John Wilson; claim filed February 10, 1852, confirmed by the Commission December 27, 1853; by the District Court March 3, 1856, and appeal dismissed December 8, 1856; containing, 18,833. 86 acres." Patented.
THE UNITED STATES, Appellants, vs. ANTONIA CAZARES, claiming the Rancho Canada de Pogolome .- " Claim for two leagues of land situated in Marin (and Sonoma) county, in Bodega and Analy townships, confirmed by the Board, and appealed by the United States." It appears from the document- ary evidence in this case that James Dawson, the deceased husband of the present claimant, on December 27, 1837, presented a petition to the com- manding General, setting forth that he, together with MeIntosh and one James Black, had obtained a grant for the place called "La Punta del Estero del Americano;" that he had built a house upon it, and planted a large vine- yard and an orchard with more than two hundred fruit trees, and had placed upon it cattle, horses, etc. He further represented that the grant had been obtained in partnership with the two persons mentioned, but that McIntosh was attempting to eject him. He therefore prayed that he might be pro- tected in his rights.
The petitioner, though he had long resided in the country, does not appear to have been naturalized at the time of making this petition, but the docu- ments show that letters of naturalization were obtained by him on December 29, 1841.
On September 18, 1843, he renewed his application to be put in possession of the land, and the Governor, to whom this second petition was addressed, referred it to the Secretary for information. By the reports of that officer it appears, that although the petition for the land had been in the name of the three applicants, yet the grant had been made to McIntosh solely, as he alone possessed the essential requisite of being a naturalized Mexican citizen. The Secretary therefore suggests that, although the request of Dawson cannot be granted, yet inasmuch as he had since been naturalized, and had married a Mexican woman, his application for another piece of land should be favorably considered.
149
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
The Governor, in accordance with this suggestion, on October 21, 1843, ordered the proceedings to be returned to the party interested for his infor- mation. It is presumed that it was in this way that these documents came into the parties' possession, and are not now found among the archives.
It does not appear that Dawson petitioned for a grant before his death, which occurred very soon after; but a grant is produced in which it is recited that his widow, the present claimant, has sufficiently proved the right of her deceased husband to petition for the land which she then occupied, and in consideration of the great losses sustained by her husband on separating himself from McIntosh, and the favorable reports, etc., the Governor grants to her the land solicited, known by the name of the "Canada de Pogolome," to the extent of two square leagues, a little more or less.
It is this land which is now claimed by the appellee. This grant was issued on February 12, 1844, and it appears to have been approved by the Departmental Assembly, on September 26, 1845. The genuineness of the above documents is fully proved, and it is also shown that the land was long occupied by Dawson before his decease, and since then by the present claim- ant.
Although the expediente for this grant is not among the archives, yet, as observed by the Commissioners, "its notoriety, the long possession, and the circumstances surrounding it, relieve it from any suspicion of fraud or forgery."
The boundaries, as well as the extent of the land, are specified in the grant, and indicated with evident precision on the map to which it refers. We think, therefore, that the claim is valid and ought to be confirmed."
Of this case, page 3, of the Appendix says: "Antonia Cazares, claimant for Canada de Pogolome, two square leagues, in Marin and Sonoma counties, granted February 12, 1844, by Manuel Micheltorena to Antonia Cazares; claim filed February 3, 1852, confirmed by the Commission April 11, 1853, by the District Court, March 24, 1856, and appeal dismissed December 8, 1856, containing 8,780.81 acres."
THE UNITED STATES, Appellants, vs. JOAQUIN CARRILLO, claiming the Rancho Llano de Santa Rosa-Claim for three leagues of land in Sonoma county (situated in Santa Rosa and Analy townships), confirmed by the Board, and appealed by the United States.
" It appears from the expediente in this case that the claimant, on June 22, 1843, petitioned Governor Micheltorena for a grant of land on the plain adjoining the rancho of his mother. The Governor, however, suspended action on the subject, as no judicial measurement had been made of the adjoining ranchos, and the extent of the sobrante or surplus reserved was not ascertained.
" On March 12, 1844, the claimant applied to the Alcalde of the district
150
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
for permission to sow, and build a house upon the land, during the pendency of his application to the Governor for a grant. The Alcalde granted him leave to sow the land, holding himself responsible to the owners of the lands if there should be any damage, but he refused him permission to build the house.
"On March 26, 1844, the claimant renewed his application to the Gov- ernor, stating that his petition still remained unacted upon on account of the neglect of the colindantes or adjoining proprietors to have their lands measured according to law.
" The Secretary, to whom this second petition was referred, reported favor- ably to it, and advised a grant of not more than three square leagues, sub- ject to the measurements of the adjoining proprietors.
" In accordance with this report the grant now produced was made; and it appears in evidence that he built, first, a small house, and afterwards a very large one on the land, on which he has continued ever since to reside. He has also cultivated from one to three hundred acres of it with corn, barley, wheat, etc.
" The handwriting of the grant in the possession of the party is fully proved, and there seems no reason to doubt the entire validity of this claim.
"The map and the designation in the grant of the colindantes or con- terminous owners abundantly show the locality of the tract granted; and the claimants title to the land solicited must be confirmed to the extent of three leagues, subject to the measurement of the land previously granted to the colindantes. The decision of the Board must, therefore, be affirmed."
In reference to this case we find on page 35 of the appendix, "Joaquin Carrillo, claimant for Llano de Santa Rosa, three square leagues, in Sonoma county, granted March 29, 1844, by Manuel Micheltorena to Marcus West; claim filed May 31, 1852, confirmed by the commmission October 21, 1853, by the District Court, March 24, 1856, and appeal dismissed January 13, 1857, containing 13,336.55 acres."
THE UNITED STATES, Appellants, vs. JOHN B. R. COOPER, claiming the Rancho El Molino .- Claim four leagues of land in Sonoma county (situated in Santa Rosa, Analy and Russian River townships), confirmed by the Board, and appealed by the United States.
"The claimant in this case, a naturalized Mexican citizen, obtained in December, 1833, a grant from the Governor for the place called Rio Ayoska. This grant was approved by the Departmental Assembly, and a certificate of its confirmation delivered to the grantee, as appears from the testimony, and the expediente filed in this case.
"He subsequently appealed to the Governor for an exchange of the land granted for that now claimed by him. Proceedings on this application were commenced by Governor Figueroa, and the new grant was made, as desired by the petitioner, by Governor Gutierrez, on February 24, 1836.
151
HISTORY OF SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
"These facts are proved by the testimony of Hartnell and Vallejo, whose evidence is corroborated by the expediente on file in the archives.
"The genuineness of the grant is fully established.
" Previously to obtaining the last grant, the claimant had gone into possess ion of the tract solicited, and had built a house upon it. He also had, as early as 1834, placed a considerable number of cattle upon it, and had com- menced the erection of a mill, upon which he expended more than ten thousand dollars. He also erected a blacksmith shop, and for two years had employed upon his rancho men to the average number of sixteen, and sometimes thirty or forty Indians.
"It is clear that the grantee fulfilled the conditions and carried out the objects of the colonization laws to an extent very unusual in the then condi- tion of the country.
"With regard to the location of the land, it appears from the testimony of O'Farrell and other witnesses, who are acquainted with the adjacent coun- try, that there is no difficulty in ascertaining its locality by means of the diseño which accompanies the grant. O'Farrell, who had long been a sur- veyor under the Mexicans, testifies that he has, by means of the grant and the diseño, made a survey of the land, and that it contains, as surveyed by him, only the quantity specified in the grant.
"The claim was held to be valid by the Board. No objections to it are sug- gested on the part of the United States, and we are of opinion that the deci- sion of the Board should be affirmed."
Page 27 of the Appendix, in regard to this grant, remarks: "John B. R. Cooper claimant for El Molino or Rio Ayoska, ten-and-one-half square leagues, in Sonoma county, granted December 31, 1833 by José Figueroa, February 24, 1836, by Nicholas Gutierrez, to J. B. R. Cooper; claimed filed April 20, 1852, confirmed by the Commission November 14, 1854, by the District Court March 24, 1856, and appeal dissmissed December 15, 1856; containing 17,892, 42 acres. Patented."
THE UNITED STATES, Appellants, vs. JACOB P. LEESE, claiming the Rancho Huichica .- Claim for five leagues of land in Sonoma county, (situated in Sonoma Township,) confirmed by the Board and appealed by the United States.
" The claimant in this case obtained on October 21, 1841, a grant from Manuel Jimeno, acting Governor of California, for two square leagues of land, as designated on the map which accompanied his petition. Juridical possession was given of the tract as delineated on the map, but the extent of land measured to him largely exceeded the quantity mentioned in the grant. He thereupon petitioned for an augmentation, and on July 6, 1844, he obtained from Governor Micheltorena an additional grant for three and one-half leagues, making in all five leagues and a half. The proofs show that
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.