Los Angeles herald., 1909-09-19
DEMANDS
A NEW STATE
LAW OPENS WAY, DECLARES
FORMER SENATOR BULLA
CLIMATIC DIFFERENCES AND SIZE
OF STATE FAVOR PLAN
City Club Members Urged to Include
Inyo County in Southland Be-
cause of Interest in
Aqueduct
lcontinnea from rare onel


tory included within the present
boundaries.
Nor did the agitation cease with
the admission of the state. In the
legislature of 1862 the question of
state division was presented in the
form of a resolution which was re-
ferred to a committee of thirteen,
which after due consideration filed
a majority report favorlng a con-
ventiOn for the revision Of the
constitution and the consideration
of the division of the state" Upon
filing this report a bin was intro
duced by o representative from San
Francisco to divide the state, but
did not meet with any considera-
ton, being Immediately laid upon
the table, where it remained during
the entire session. In the succeed
ing session QS53) the subject was
again introduced in the form Of a
joint resolution for the division of
the state into two or more states"
which received full and serious con-
sideration, but was finally laid upon
the table by vote of 10 ayes to II
noes.
Three States Suggested
Again in 1856 a member from San
Joaquin county introduced in the
assembly a bill to divide the state
into three states, to be known as
North, South and Middle California.
The measure was regularly referred
to a committee, but never reached
the files of either house for further
consideration.
- But the question would not down,
and in 1856 a member from Trinity
county introduced a bill for the Gre
alton of three states which was re-
ferred to a committee and favor
ably reported therefrom, but never
reached a vote in either house.
In 1858 another proposition was
submitted to the legislature Of Call,
fornia asking the cession by the
state of all lands lying east of the
main Sierra Nevada range of noun
tains for the purpose of combining
that with other lands and forming
new territory. The matter was duly
referred to a committee, but was
never returned to the files.
1t is significant and interesting
fact that up to this time all prOpO-
sItions looking to the division of the
state originated with members from
the north or middle portions of the
state, and that at least two of them
proposed the formation of three states
within our present boundaries.
In 1859 another bill was introduced
in the assembly by representative
from Siskiyou county to authorize.
the withdrawal from the state of all
lands lying north of the fortieth
parallel of north latitude and the
creation therein Of a separate gov
ernment This line would have
been the present southerly line of
Humboldt county extended east
~ al
the whole Of seven counties as they
now exist and a part of two others.
It does not appear that this measure
ever received any consideration
from the legislature.
Definite Action from South
At the same session Andres Pico
of Los Angeles county introduced
a bill to permit the six southern
counties to separate from the state
and form a territory to be known
as Colorado. This was the first
definite action by a resident of
Southern California in favor of the
division of the state. After the
bill had taken its regular course
through the committees Of both
houses, it was duly passed on the
18th day of April, 1859, and by 1t
consent was given to the segrega-
ton of all that portion of the state
now included in the counties of
San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara,
Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernar-
dino, Riverside, Orange, San Diego
and about tWo-thirds of the county
of Kern. The measure was condi-
toned upon Its adoption by a two
thirds vote of the territory to be
separated, and, being submitted to
the voters at the next general
election, was carried by about two
to one. I have not been able to
obtain figures showing the exact
vote for and against the proposi-
tion.
The act, having been duly adopt
ed by the legislature and ratified by
more than a two-thirds vote of the
people, to whom 1t was submitted,
it became the duty of Milton S.
Latham who was inaugurated as
governor of the state of Califor-
MIA on January 9, 1860, to see that
proper measures were taken to
bring the matter before the con-
gress of the United States, and on
the 18th day of January, 1850, he
sent a communication to the legis-
lature embodying a letter which he
had written to James Buchanan,
president of the United States, not
only calling the attention of the
president to the matter, but con-
tanning an elaborate and forceful
argument in favor of the constitu-
ii, rality of the proceedings.
This Communication was submit
ted by Governor Latham after his
election as United States senator,
there being at that time no consti-
tutional inhibition against the chief
executive of the state being elect
ed to the United States senate.
Slavery a Factor
Although he stated in his letter.
and 1t was openly proclaimed
throughout the state, that the
basis of the movement in favor of
state division was the inequality of
taxation by reason of the failure OF
the mining interests of the north to
pay their fair proportion of taxes,
1t was also tacitly understood that
the question of negro slavery en-
tered largely into the proposition.
The Democratic party of the state
was divided into two factions, one
in favor of and the other against
the extension of slavery into new
territories. Latham was the nomi-
nee of the pro- Slavery faction of his
party, and it was supposed that
he would favor the creation of a
new state or territory for the pur-
pose of making 1t possible to estab-
lish negro slavery therein. Upon
the submission of his special mes
sage above referred to a resolution
was introduced into the assembly
to carry out the provisions of the
act of 1859 by the formation of
territorial government in the six
southern counties. The resolution
was adopted in both houses, thus