Los Angeles herald., 1891-12-06

|
ents, ii a territorial government
could not be formed for the whole
country, that the country shall be so
divided as to allow them that form,
while the northern population may
adopt state government if they so pre-
fer.'
Mr.. Foster of Los Angeles: "Although
am acting under instructions similar
to those OF my colleague, do not be-
lieve that majority of my constituents
wish separation. There is no doubt
that they desire territorial government,
but | believe they would prefer to bear
their share of state government rather
than divide the country"
Kimball II. Dimmick, Of San
jose said: ''The native Califor-
mans are nearly unanimously in favor
of state government"
The vote stood: Ayes, %; noes, 8,
all the southern members-Foster, Hill,
Ride, Stearns, Carrillo and Rodriguez
voting in the negative. A. M. Pico OF
San Jose and Mr.. Tefft of San Luis
Obispo voted with the south. In prize
fighting parlance Southern California
was knocked out in the first round.
| 1t was then discovered that the con-
vention had been transacting business
without quoruml but the decision
stood.
Mr.. Fosters speech will not bear
close analysis. He had been
elected a delegate by majority
vote, and that same majority had in
structed him to vote for a territorial
form OF government, which instructions
he obeyed in the letter but not in the
spirit. His faith was not founded On
facts, for after his return home his con
stituents, in convention assembled at
Los Angeles, not only pronounced for
separation but protested against the
burden Of state government. Mr..
Foster did not represent his constituents
fairly when he stated matters of
private belief before the convention. his
FUTURE STATE DIVISION.
The question of division did not
come up again in the convention
as a direct proposition, but there
were many illusions to it in the
forcible and physical discussions that
followed on the slavery and boundary
questions.
On September 18th the chair appoint
ed the following committee on the
boundary of the state L. w. Hastings
of Sacramento, j. A. Sutter of Sacra-
mento, P. Hugo Reid of Los Angeles,
Pablo de la Guerra of Santa Barbara,
and Jacinto Rodriguez of Santa Barbara.
browns report. p. 54.)
On the 18th the committee reported:
Your committee are OF the
opinion that the present boundary of
California comprehends a tract of
country entirely too extensive for one
state. The country within
the boundary of this territory
as now established must ulti-
mately be divided and sub-divided
into several different states, which di-
visions and subdivisions (should the
present boundary be adopted) would be
very likely to divest the state of Cali
fornia of valuable portion of her sea
coast Ibid. p. 1881
On the 22d the convention considered
the report in the committee of the
whole. The very long and acrimonious
fight whether the eastern boundary
should be the Sierra Nevada or the
Rocky mountains, as we'll as the fight |
on the slavery question, are irrelevant
here, only as illusions were therein
made to state division.
During the discussion William M.
Gwin OF San Francisco county
said: "If we include territory
enough for several states, it is compe-
tent for the people and the state of
California to divide it hereafter. This
is privilege guaranteed by the consti.
tuition of the United States" Ibid, p.
1853.
Mr.. Semples said: "The Sierra Ne
vada is the great natural boundary. i
III we secure this valley lying be-
tween the Sierra Nevada and the Pacific
it is all we desire. 1t is the limit formed
by nature for this state"
Mr.. Hastings replied: "We found
that to fix the boundary of the Sierra
Nevada, and follow the crest of that
chain of mountains as the line, would
intersect the ocean to the northward of
San Diego."s~
Both were correct, and this
natural boundary" will yet divide
the state. The convention resolved
itself into two bitter factions, one ad-
vocating the Sierra Nevada boundary
line, and the otheri the Rocky noun
tains. If the southern delegates had
then been learned in the wisdom of the
politicians of today, their "balance of
power" Combines or ''pooled is
Sues" having eight votes out of forty
eight, would certainly have given the
Sierra Nevada party the victory. The
Rocky mountain party were finally de-
feated by the discovery of decree in
the old Spanish archives fixing the
boundary between California and New
Mexico on the longitude of Salt lake
north of the Colorado river to the 42d
degree. Ibid, p. 45l.)
Mr.. Semple, again speaking. quoted
article 4, section 3, of the national con-
stitution, and said: "This, then, gives
congress the power to form new states,
with the consent of the legislature,
either within the, jurisdiction of one
state already existing or new state to
be admitted. You will find in
the admission Of Maine that there was
just such a proposition made there
originally. 1t will be recollected by the
house that none of the original states
had their boundaries defined. Virginia
claimed all the territory from the At
lantic to the western ocean.
The boundary of Virginia once in
cluded the very territory we now occupy.
In the territory of Massachusetts, Maine
was included. 1t was district of Mas
sachusetts; and the gentleman will OBJ
serve in the preamble OF the act ad-
mitting Maine, that it was constituted
an independent, state by an act of the
Massachusetts, legislature, which was
ratified by congress as provided in the
constitution, ana she barely passed an
act OF four lines and half, saying
Maine is member of tho rnion -