Los Angeles herald., 1891-12-06

WV POIblOu VI NdlllOTuld WtSb VI tut
Sierras should become of sufficien
Importance to be divided, then we neet
not say anything about it in our con
stitution. The constitution of the
United States says how it is to be done
With the consent of California, con
gress may divide that portion of the
state into two states" (Ibid, page 189. >,
Mr.. Gwin said "And the past his
tory OF our country, sir, develops the
TACT that we will have state upon state
here-probably as many as the Atlantic
slde-and as we accumulate states, we
accumulate strength; our institutions
become more powerful to do good and
not to do evil. / have no doubt that the
time will come when we will have
twenty states this side of the Rocky
mountains. want the power, sir, and
the population. When the population
comes, they will require that this state
shall be divided" Ibid, p. 1867
There was an argument between the
northern and southern members on the
question of taxation. Qbid, PIP. 364-
376.)
Mr.. Tefft, of San Luis Obispo, cham
pioned the southern cause. He sug-
gested poll tax in addition to the taxes
on real and personal property. The
realty tax would impoverish the large
land holders without enriching the state,
and they were mostly in the south. In
the north tho population were shifting
and without property. The population
of the south were entirely different.
Qbid. p. 369.)
Abel Stearns OF Los Angeles, as COM
mltteeman, in report suggested an
income tax. The convention decided to
tax all property in the state.
j. J. Ayers said: 1T is a very old
question. Indeed, there was very
strong opposition In this part of Alta
California in 1S49 against forming
state with this section attached to it.
So strong was that sentiment that inn
portant concessions, especially in the
mode OF assessing property, had to be
made to the southern members in the
constitutional convention before they
would agree to state government.
Later on, in 1850. the same objections
to being part Of the state were devel.
oped in public meetings here, and the
reasons given then would be Just as SER
viceable in the discussion of division
now as they were at that time against
joining the north. The fact is, the ques-
ton of division has always been an
alluring one with US, simply because it
is based on natural causes that excite
repugnancy OF interests that will always
exist"
APPORTIoNMENT.
Thequestion of apportionment aroused
the Southern Californians, when they
felt the injustice that was being dealt
them. The proposed apportionment
was: One senator for San Diego and
Los Angeles, one senator for Santa Bar
bara and San Luis Obispo, one assem-
bsyman.for San Diego, two assemblymen
for Los Angeles and two for Santa Bar
bara.
This gave Southern California II per
cent of the legislature.
Mr.. Hill of San Diego objected. He
wanted San Diego and Los Angeles each
to have seuator, as they have distinct
interests and separate seaports.
Mr.. Carrillo of Los Angeles said San
Diego had only about 1000 population,
and Los Angeles 5000. He thought Mr..
Hills proposition unjust. He also re-
ferred to the migratory character of the
argonauts of Northern California.
After discussion Mr.. Hills amend
ment was rejected.
THE BOUNDARIES AGAIN.
The question of the state boun-
daries coming up again, w.
s. Sherwood, of Sacramento said
"We have several states now much
larger than they ultimately will
be. When by compact Texas was an
nexed to the United States, that COM
pact embraced over 100000 square
miles-enough for two or three states.
1t is not, and was not assumed, on the
annexation of Texas, that it
would be the only state formed
out of that immense territory.
1t is now a settled opinion
that when Texas receives population
sufficient to entitle her to division, a
new state will be formed; and so, if we
embrace larger limits than ultimately
may be the desire Of the people, new
state can be formed, or two or three
states, if it be desirable! (Ibid. D.
41S.)
John McDougal of Sacramento said
Mature, sir, has marked out for us the
boundary line of California. God has
designated her limits, and we ought not
to go beyond the line traced by the Om-
nipotent hand. The snowy range OF the
Sierra Nevada separates two communi-
ties OF this country, one community liv-
ing upon the eastern side and the other
upon the western; they can have no
connection, either social or political. l
therefore am opposed to any line which
proposes TO connect the two, or bring
them under the same government and
the same laws" (Ibid., p. 420.)
Mr.. McDougall evidently did not hear
or else had forgotten Mr.. Hastings ex-
PLANTATION that "the sierra's intersected
the ocean north of San Diego" but he
told the truth.
The convention adjourned without
day, on October 18th, after session of
forty-three days. At the general cleo
tion on November 18th following, the
constitution was adopted, and Peter H.
Burnett was elected governor. The first
legislature met at San Jose, December
10, 1S49, and was in session until April
%, 1850.
The foregoing abstract from the report
of the Monterey convention develops
two important facts:
First: That Southern California en-
tered the state OF California under pro-
test.
Second: That the trainers of the con-
stitution of the state of California wrote
that instrument with the agreed but
implied condition that when increased
population justified it the state should
be divided into two or more states.
Fell Dead.
These words are very familiar to our readers,