The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 17, July 1913 - April, 1914 Page: 127
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:
Movement for State Division of California, 1849-1860 127
states out of the state of California.8 The first section of this
act provided for enlarging the boundaries cf California by making
its eastern boundary a line running from the intersection of the
forty-second degree of latitude with the one hundred and nineteenth
of longitude, to the point where the Colorado river first touches
California, and thence down this river to where Mexico joins Cali-
fornia. Other sections provided for the division of the territory
included within the enlarged bounds into a southern, a central, and
a northern state, to be known respectively as "Colorado," "Cali-
fornia," and "Shasta."9
The full discussion of the proposed division, which occurred on
April 17, indicated the general sentiment of the legislature towards
the proposal, and the arguments made on the occasion are of inter-
est. Douglas, of San Joaquin County, contended that the state
was too, extensive for one government; the supreme court was too
inaccessible because of the distance from the extremities of the
state; the representation in Congress was too small for so large
a territory. Ferrell, of San Diego, argued for the bill as an act
of justice to the southern part of the state; he thought the south
suffered because of its distance from the, capital; the state was
too large with its 1,000 miles of sea coast and 188,000 square miles
of territory. It was contended by Hunt, of San Bernardino, that
the God of nature and of the constitution had forbidden that the
southern portion of the state should be trampled under foot; he
knew the situation of the people because of his long residence in
the state; their property was exhausted day by day by the burdens
of taxation placed upon them. Buffum, of San Francisco, argued
along the same lines. The people of the south had a right to feel
a,ggrieved at the north; bills had been introduced in the legisla-
ture inapplicable to both the north and the south; the creator
had made the northern and southern portions of the state dis-
similar in physical and geographical character. On the other
hand, it was thought by Burke, of Mariposa County, that the portion
to be set off as the state of California would not contain inhabitants
sufficient to enable it to become a state, and for that reason he
thought the bill premature and fraught with danger to the peace of
society.Wournal of the Assembly, 1855, 613.
'Hayes' Constitutional Law, 47.
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/m1/131/: accessed May 5, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.