Los Angeles herald., 1892-01-03
NORTH AND SOUTH.
Vandever's State Division
Bill introduced.
A Mass Meeting Held in Los
Angeles.
The Proposed Division Not on Nat
ural Lines.
MANY Objections to the Division Made
ny Residents of the Northern
section-Tbe History
up to Date.
fsr B. A. CECIL srRrHnss--A nrrcIH rx)

means, was the telegraphlc announce
nent on December 6, 1888, that General
William Vandever, member of congress
from the Sixth California district, had
introduced a bill in the house of repre-
sentatiyes providing for the division of
the state of California. The bill pro-
yided that the new states should be
known as North and South California.
The state OF South California was to in
eiude the counties OF the Sixth congress
sional district, to-wit: Monterey, San
Benito, Fresno, Tulare, Kern, San Luis
Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura. Los
Angeles, San Diego, San Bernardino,
Inyo, Mono and Alpine, together with
the counties of Merced, Mariposa and
Tuolumne.
The proposed division was not made
upon natural lines, and that part of the
proposed new state OF South California
north of the Sierra Nevada strongly OBJ
jected to the proposition. The bill was
introduced without any preconcerted ac-
ton on the partof the section that needs
che division. Still there was almost a
universal sentiment in its favor ex-
pressed by the southern press. The
matter was widely discussed. Taking
time by the forelock, Dir. ]. P. Widney,
who had long been an ardent advocate
Of the question, circulated call for "a
mass meeting to take into consideration
she movement for the division of the
state, and the organization OF the new
state of South California" The call was
signed by J. P. Widney, E. w. Jones,
George I'll. Bonebrake, E. f. Spence,
L. j. Rose, Albert M. Stephens,
w. f. Fitzgerald, George H. Smith, A.
GlasseIl, G. E. Thorn, John G. Downey,
H. 7. Hazard, John +. Platter, Harper
& REYNOLDS, D. Freeman, r. M. Wild
ney, Charles Maclay, j. s. Slauson, HI.
7. Paine, Hellman, Hass & Co., s. W.
Luitweiler, K. Cohn & Co., Charles ST.
lent, Fl. Jevne, H. H. Boyce, John I.
Redick, H. Sinsabaugh, G. ]. Griffith,
BE- Coulter, James j.. Ayres, Hervey
Lindley, III. G. Wilmer, Los Angeles
Furniture company, Eugene Germain,
y. L. Stern, l.. Loeb, W. III. Workman,
John F. Humphreys, J. Kuhrts, G. G.
Allen.
Ahe meeting was held in Hazards pa
v7liOn, on the evening of December 3,
1883. Some 200 persons responded to
the short-timed call. E. w. Jones,
chairman of the Los Angeles chamber
of commerce. called the meeting to
order. Ex-Mayor w. HI. Work man
was elected president, and H. q. Os-
horne, editor of the Evening Express,
secretary. E. w. Jones. w. +. Wade,
III. Newmark, J. I. Redick were ap.
pointed committee on resolutions.
Speeches were made by DR.. Widney, G.
r. Thons, j j Ayres, j. |. Redick and
HI. ID. Barrows.
-
che division of the state into Two states
On an east and west line, and requested
the representatives in the state and
national legislatures to use all honor
able means to bring about such divi-
sion.
"a. j.. Wicks made the only opposition
speech. He believes in state pride
Northern California had recently showed
ats good will by loaning Los Angeles
81. 900 600. He also believes that state
division is contrary to the national con-
Stitution. When asked how about West
Virginia, he weakly replied that ''it was
a wsr measure of which the Republican
party should be ashamed -
The meeting adopted the resolutions
BY a standing vote of 118 for to Ia
against, several of the latter being San
Francisco drummers, who chanced to be
present.
The chair appointed an executive
committee to carry on the work, consist
img of G. E. Thorn, W.4F. Fitzgerald, H.
r. Hazard, R. M. Widney and Fl. New
aaark. and the meeting adjourned with
three hearty cheers for the state of
South California.
Tine question was widely discussed by
the press It developed the fact that
aaany Northern Californians are favor
able TO the south having its rights, and
that very few in the south are disposed
against her best interests. Nothing
more was ever heard OF the Vandever
bill, and like nine days wonder, it
was soon forgotten.
The question disturbed the dreams OF
the politicians of Northern California
ike nightmare, and when the guber-
naxoriai campaign of 1890 came on they
started in to revive the matter in a
rather curious manner.
The annual convention of the South
ern California Editorial association met
In July of that year at Santa Barbara.
What was the surprise OF the southern
editors to meet a host of northern edi-
tors. The busness of the convention
was almost forgotten among the festivi-
kies which followed. side meeting
Nas held in which w. H. Mills. prom
inght advocate of the northern citrus
belt, and couple OF renegade southern
editors made anti state division speeches.
The southern editors present were all
dependent upon Mr.. Mills, who is a
high railroad official, for their passes,
tise;r leaders were absent, and the 9TH
ers were either too jovial or engrossed
with the ladies to take up the cudgel
al defence. Besides, the question was
sprung upon them unawares, and others
thought its mention in the presence o.
northerners would be violation of good
breeding. Any way, the northern Cali
fornians, with the assistance OF some
southern traitors, carried the day. One
gf the n. c. b. editors, on his return
home. said that Estate division received
q blow below the belt at Santa Barbara
snd the poor thing never knew wha
killed it.
Having made q corpse, the n. c. D
should have been content, but as th'
eampaign came on that summer, certain
of the northern press charged that th'
southern candidates favored state di
vi3ion. One of the chief northern Sian
dere had been that only politicians up
held the movement. How quickly thi
re was confeutd is known by the rapid
L ~ ~ 1ur rId