Kern County
History
SOURCE: Memorial and Biographical History of the counties of Fresno, Tulare and Kern, California - Chicago, The Lewis Publishing Company, 1892
THE great gold rush of 1855 {transcribers
note: the gold rush was underway in California in 1849} was accompanied with
the usual fond dreams of future greatness for the region, and plans for
self-government were the quite natural result of these dreams.
Hence, a move was launched for the creation
of a new County, and the efforts of the proponents of the move were crowned
with at least partial success.
A bill was introduced in the California
Legislature calling for the creation of Kern County out of the Southern
portion of Tulare County. After amending the bill by substituting the name
Buena Vista for Kern, the bill was passed by both the Senate and the
Assembly, and was signed by Governor John Bigler, April 13, 1855.
The bill for the creation of Kern County was
introduced by none other than Colonel Thomas Baker, then a member of the
Assembly from Tulare County, who was later to gain much prominence as the
pioneer developer of Kern County, and who was to give his name to the
county's chief city. The amendment changing the name of Buena Vista County
was introduced by Assemblyman C. T. Ryland of Santa Clara County, who
evidently desired a more poetic name than that suggested in Colonel Baker's
bill.
The act provided that when a majority of the
voters of the proposed new county, together with a majority of the voters of
Tulare County, had signed petitions for the formation of the new county, an
election should be called for the purpose of choosing county officers.
The territory of Buena Vista County was
defined in the first section of the statute in these words: "All that
portion of the county of Tulare South of the township line dividing
Townships Number Twenty-one and Twenty-two South, shall constitute a new
county to be called Buena Vista County."
When the Legislature of 1856 convened, the
provisions of the act had not been complied with, and hence the county was
not functioning, but plans for the new county were by no means dead, as will
be seen by the following act, formally approved April 16, 1856, amending the
original act:
SECTION I.-All that portion of the County of
Tulare situated south of the township line dividing Townships Number Twenty
and Twenty-one South shall constitute a new county by the name of Buena
Vista.
SECTION 2.-Section 9 of said act is hereby
amended to read as follows: "The salary of the County Judge of said County
shall be $500 per annum, and the salary of the District Attorney of said
County shall be $250 per annum.
The salaries had been previously set at
twice these amounts .
One can not help but wonder if there were
references in those days to "high salaried public officials."
The year 1856 did not-nor did the year
1857-see the requirements of the original legislation complied with, but
hope for the new county was still cherished, for on March 3, 1858, we find
the California law-making body officially approving the following amendment:
SECTION I.-The provisions of an Act entitled
"An Act to organize the County of Buena Vista," approved April 13, 1855, are
hereby extended and shall apply to the year A. D. 1859.
SECTION 2.-The Act, entitled "An Act to Amend An Act to Organize Buena Vista
County," approved April 16, 1856, is hereby repealed."
Despite the apparent continued interest on
the part of both the residents of the district and the California State
Legislature, Buena Vista County never came into full legal existence. It is
interesting to note, however, that even as late as 1860, Buena Vista County
was recognized as a political subdivision of the State: On a map compiled in
that year by one Vincent, whose Christian name is unknown, a generous block
of pink occupies the space within the county's boundaries, and imprinted
thereon in letters of commanding proportions are the words Buena Vista
County.
Incidentally the following place names
appear within Buena Vista County's borders, on this interesting old map:
Vern River (note the spelling) Kern Lake (it will be noted that the K is
used here), Buena Vista Lake, Keyville (note the absence of the S in this
name), Maltby's Mill, Dutch Bar, Gordon's Ferry, Salt Sp., Leonard's H. (the
H is evidently the geographer's abbreviation for House, or possibly Hill),
Lynn's River and Posa Flat. Incidentally Fort Tejon was not included in
Buena Vista County, an irregular line leaving it in Los Angeles County.
This interesting old map, beautifully printed in colors, is still in a most
excellent state of preservation in the Henry E. Huntington Library at San
Marino. In the margin it is stated that it was engraved by Ch. Smith, and
printed by Mangeon & Jacques, but the address of the printers is not given.
Buena Vista County never got beyond the
stage of being designated as a county by the Legislature and by the map
makers, but the partially successful effort to create it undoubtedly marked
the planting of the seed from which the county of Kern was later to grow.
Before its total demise Buena Vista County,
itself a division of Tulare County, figured in a plan for division not only
of the county, but of the state! There have been from time to time many
plans for state division, but this one came nearer consummation than any
attempted before or since, and had it been totally consummated Buena Vista
County would have found itself partially in one state and partially in
another, with the creation of another new county a natural result.
An act of the Legislature, officially
approved April, 1859, gave the consent of the State governing body for a
vote on the division of the State, and the creation in the Southern part of
the State of a "Territorial or other form of government under the name of
the Territory of Colorado, or such other name as may be deemed meet and
proper."
Section Two of the act said that "The
Governor shall in his proclamation for the next General Election direct the
voters of the counties of San Diego, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Santa
Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and a part of Buena Vista, to wit: such part as
shall include all of the precincts South of the Sixth Standard Parallel
South of Mount Diablo Meridian, at such General Election vote 'For a
Territory,' or 'Against a Territory,' and in case two-thirds of a whole
number of voters voting thereon shall vote for a change of government, the
consent hereby given shall be deemed consummated."
In accordance with the Governor's Election
Proclamation, the election was held in September, 1859, and as will be seen
by the following detailed figures on the vote, it actually carried. The vote
was as follows:
For-Los Angeles County, 1407; San Bernardino County, 441; San
Luis Obispo County, 10; San Diego County, 207; Santa Barbara County, 395;
Buena Vista County, 17; Total, 2477.
Against-Los Angeles County, 441; San Bernardino County, 29; San
Luis Obispo County, 283; San Diego County, 24; Santa Barbara County, 51;
Buena Vista County, 0; Total, 828. (Although the vote here is given for
Buena Vista County, it was legally the vote of a portion of Tulare County,
since Buena Vista County was not officially functioning as a county.)
When this vote was taken, Civil War clouds
were commencing to hover over the land, and the heavy vote in favor of
division represented the vote of the Southern sympathizers. In 1860, a
representative, who, although a Republican, had strong Southern sympathies,
was sent to Washington to plead the cause of recognition of the proposed new
state or territory, in the United States Senate. The Senate had other and
more important troubles before it, and little attention was paid to the
pleas for a new state or territory. In the same year-1860-there was a bill
introduced in the California Legislature to rescind the action taken on this
matter by the Legislature of 1859. However, this bill got no further than
the introduction stage. So, both the State and Buena Vista County were
actually divided, if the action of the California Legislature of 1859 and
the subsequent vote of the people were legal; but nothing has ever come of
it, as we all well know.
Local historians claim that there was a move
at one time to create a county to be known as Tejon County, but there
appears to be no official record of it. When the name Buena Vista was
substituted for Kern, the name of "Tejon" County may have been suggested;
or, more likely still, "Tejon" might have been suggested as the name of the
new county that would have necessarily been created had the State division
plan come to full fruition.
All through the 50's and the 60's the mining
districts continued to be the magnets to attract new arrivals, but there
were a few who were agriculturally-minded, and settlers on the soil
commenced to come in small numbers at somewhat wide intervals.
Among the real early settlers was Isaac
Hart, William Weldon and J. V. Roberts were among the first settlers in
Walker Basin. They came in the early 50's, and made a good thing supplying
the miners of Keysville with beef, bringing the supplies from Los Angeles by
pack train unti11857 or 1858 when the pack trains were succeeded by ox-team
freighters. Weldon later removed to the South Fork of the Kern River.
Frank Barrows and John Nicoll are also
listed among the South Fork settlers of 1857. William Scodie and Thomas
Smith settled on the upper end of the South Fork in 1861 or 1862. Other
early settlers on the South Fork were William W. Lander and George Cancy,
1861; J. L. Mack, 1864.
Myron Angell tells us:
In 1861 the first white man camped and
settled on what has since been designated as Kern Island. In 1862 two or
three others followed, and in a short time were joined by Thomas Baker,
better known as Colonel Baker, a man of foresight and good judgment.
The only means of communication at that day
with the outside world was two stage lines-one via Havilah to Los Angeles,
the other via Havilah to Owen's River. From Havilah the road crossed
Greenhorn Mountains to Visalia.
Colonel Baker, with his usual energy built
at great expense a toll road from the foot of the mountain, a distance of 27
miles, to Havilah, and a desultory communication was established.
September 28, 1850, the Congress of the
United States passed the "Swamp Act," giving the swamp and overflow lands to
the states. In 1857 the California Legislature passed an act providing for
the reclamation of all swamp and overflowed land within Kern County's
present borders, and extending North beyond Tulare Lake, a half million
acres or so being involved. W. F. Montgomery, Joseph Montgomery, A. J.
Downes and F. W. Sampson were given the franchise to reclaim all this land;
but their rights were shortly thereafter acquired by Colonel Thomas Baker
and Harvey S. Brown, Baker being the active and aggressive head of the
co-partnership.
This action marked a phase of development in Kern County's history of
outstanding importance-yes, super importance-but it will be dealt with in
more detail in a succeeding chapter.
The story of the Kern district's earliest settlements might have been
entirely different had the aims of the Reverend Eugene McNamara been
realized, for he planned to colonize the district with 10,000 Irishmen, in
1845.
Father McNamara was a native of Ireland, a Catholic priest and apostolic
missionary. He advanced a scheme to the Mexican government for the
colonization of Alta California, agreeing to immediately import 2,000 Irish
families, totaling 10,000 persons, and place them on the soil, provided
Mexico would grant him vast tracts of land along the AIta California Coast.
The Mexicans balked at parting with the valuable coast lands, but agreed
to, and did actually, want vast areas in the San Joaquin Valley, including
much of the territory in what is now Kern County. It was Father McNamara's
plan to place his first 10,000 Irish settlers on the South end of the grant
(Kern County of today), but it was held that the grant had been actually
signed some few days after Mexico had relinquished control of Alta
California to the United States, and as a result the Kern district failed to
become the stamping ground of a contingent of agriculturalists from the
Emerald Isle.
There is still some dispute among certain
historians as to the actual date of signing of the McNamara grant, but in
any event, the grant was held to be invalid, and the plan never matured.
Incidentally, the plan was looked upon in some quarters as a British scheme
to gain peaceable domination in Alta California, Father McNamara merely
being selected as a British emissary on account of his faith, which matched
that of the ruling powers of Mexico, and served, so it was thought, to hide
the real issue at stake.
Chapter V
Where Rolls the Kern, A History of Kern
County, California
Enterprise Press, 1934 Herbert G Comfort
transcribed by Carolyn Feroben