The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 17, July 1913 - April, 1914 Page: 121
454 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
M11ovement for State Division of California, 1849-1860 121
4. In the legislature of 1858.-On January 13, 1853, Mr.
Myres of Placer County, introduced in the Assembly, a, bill
entitled "an act recommending to the electors to vote for or against
calling a constitutional convention."'2 The bill was referred to a
special committee, was reported back to the Assembly, and on
March 24, passed that body by a vote of 46 to 12.43 In the
proceedings and report of the special committee, there is little to
indicate a connection of the bill with a purpose to divide the
state, except that both measures were unanimously supported by
members from the south. The report of the committee, however,
pointed out defects in the constitution, and among other things
made reference to the dissatisfaction existing in the south due
to the disparity of taxation between the two sections.44
In the Senate, where much discussion took place over the pro-
posed measure, the purpose of those advocating a convention is
more clearly brought out. On January 26, reports were received
from the select committee to, whom had been referred so much of
the governor's message as referred to changes in the constitution.
The majority report, submitted by Mr. Snyder and Mr. Lott, was
against the calling of a constitutional convention. This report
shows that it was generally understood that an effort to divide
the state would be made should a convention be called. Division of
the state at some future time was pointed to as a probability
by the report, and was even held as desirable, but immediate
division was opposed because, it was asserted, that in making a
division it would be necessary for the southern part of the state
to become a territory, where the population, free from taxation,
would have no inducement to diminish their estates, as a conse-
quence of which development would be slow in that section. Be-
sides, the falling of a part of the territory back into pupilage would
diminish the coast in the estimation of the world.'5
The first minority report, in discussing the disparity of taxation
complained of, pointed out that the same inequality existed between
the agricultural and the mining counties throughout the state, and
that southern California did not suffer more than the other agricul-
"'Journal of the Assembly, 1852, 61.
4"Ibid., 317.
"44Journal of the Assembly, 1853, Document 26, Appendix, p. 5.
"Journal of the Senate, 1853, Appendix, Document 16, pp. 1-9.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 17, July 1913 - April, 1914, periodical, 1914; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101061/m1/125/: accessed May 5, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.