|
||
|
|
|
|
Resolving Disputed Claims of the Fernandez Grant and Boga-Larkin Grant in Northern California and John Sutter's Nueva Helvetia Grant.
The present map provides an overview of Butte County and the north part of Yuba County, for the purpose of addressing the legal claims of the Boga-Larkin Grant and Fernandez Grant, as well as the areas John Sutter's Nueva Helvetia Grant. Compiled from U.S. surveys by W.S. Watson, the map provides a fine overview of the public and private land grants in the area, including topographical features such as rivers, mountains, and property boundaries.
Between about 1852 and1865, these three Mexican land grants would result in numerous court cases and new land surveys, in order to resolve the conflicting claims and vague "surveys" and Disegno mas which gave rise to their creation and ultimately overlapping claims.
In summary, the land shown on the map covers a number of early land grants, including the John Sutter's Nueva Helvetia Grant, Osio Grant (Rancho Aguas Frias), Neals Ranch (Rancho Esquon), the Grant of Henrique Huber (not surveyed and ultimately denied), Honcut Ranch (Rancho Honcut), Cambuston Grant (rejected by the Supreme Court in 1877), and the aforementioned Fernandez Grant, which is here divided into 3 parts.
Curiously, the Boga-Larkin Grant, which would be finally confirmed to the heir of Thomas Larkin in 1865, is not shown. In its place, a large area is shown, with a note indicating that "This Section is not in the original this copy being furnished by appellant . . ." Based upon the foregoing, it would seem that this map was likely drawn up in about 1857. Because this map does not mention Boga or Larkin by name, it would seem most likely that this map relates to the appeal of the original Fernandez Grant claim, which was originally confirmed in 1855, with an appeal filed and dismissed in 1857. However, it is also possible that it was made in connection with the disputed claims between the Fernandez Grant and the Boga-Larkin Grant to the south, both of which were immediately north of the claims of John Sutter and his Nueva Helvetia Grant. This would place the date between about 1859 and 1865.
The dating also corresponds with details from several of the neighboring land grants that had been surveyed, but not yet confirmed or rejected. These are summarized below.
Beyond its role in resolving the land claims between the Boga-Larkin and Fernandez Claimants, the map is a remarkable compendium of geographical data for the area. A number of early towns are located, including Oroville (first named in 1854), Thomson's Flat, Marysville (named in 1850), and Colusa (renamed from Colusi in 1854). Dozens of early ranches, houses and settlements are shown, along with early roads, ferries, fields, houses, and mineral lands east of the Feather River.
The map is also quite remarkable for its detailed treatment of the different courses and channels of the Feather River and the numerous early fields and irrigation sloughs in the region.
Of further note is the appearance of the names Henshaw and "Moor" in the upper part of the Fernandez Grant. This is almost certainly the same Henshaw and Moore who would become embroiled in a dipuste over a ferry license across the Feather River originally granted to S.Y. Hale in November 1856, which would finally be resolved by the US Supreme Court in 1873 (see below). The absence of Hale's Ferry further suggests a date of 1857.
The Boga-Larkin Grant and the Fernandez Grant: A Conflict and Its Resolution (1843-1881)
The story of the Boga-Larkin Grant and its neighboring Fernandez Grant is a tale of land ownership conflicts, legal battles, and the evolving landscape of California during the mid-19th century.
In 1843, Charles William Flugge, a well-educated German immigrant who had arrived in California, applied for a land grant in the region inhabited by the Boga Indians. Governor Micheltorena approved the petition in 1844, and the Departmental Assembly confirmed it in 1845. Flugge's legal background led him to provide an unusually precise description of the land he requested, specifying its boundaries in great detail.
Meanwhile, in 1846, Governor Pio Pico granted four square leagues of land to the Fernandez brothers, Dionisio and Maximo (the sons of the Alcalde of Monterey, José Zenon Fernandez), in the same general area as the Boga Grant. The Fernandez Grant was described less precisely, with boundaries marked by natural features such as the Feather River, the north boundary of Sutter's grant, and the foothills. This overlapping region set the stage for future conflicts.
Following the Mexican-American War (1846-1848) and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, California became part of the United States. The treaty required that existing Mexican land grants be honored, provided the claimants could prove their legitimacy. The California Land Act of 1851 established a commission to review these claims, necessitating extensive legal proceedings to confirm the validity of each grant.
Charles William Flugge's grant, now known as the Boga Grant, was sold to Thomas O. Larkin in 1847. Larkin submitted his claim to the Land Commission in 1852, which declared it valid in 1853, initiating a preliminary survey. However, this survey revealed inaccuracies, particularly in the latitude designated by Flugge. A corrected survey was ordered, aligning the Boga-Larkin Grant's boundaries with those of Sutter's established grant.
The Fernandez Grant was confirmed by the Land Commission in 1855 and faced similar challenges. Its boundaries were less clear, leading to disputes with the Boga-Larkin Grant. The commission ruled in favor of the Boga-Larkin Grant, placing its southern boundary at Sutter's north line, thereby determining the starting point for the Fernandez Grant.
Despite the commission's rulings, the Boga-Larkin Grant's new survey in 1859 created further complications. It positioned the southern boundary one league north of Sutter's line, causing an overlap with the Fernandez Grant. The Land Office refused to issue a patent based on this survey, leading to legal appeals and further court reviews.
In 1865, the courts upheld the Boga-Larkin Grant's new survey, and President Andrew Johnson issued a patent to the Larkin heirs. This decision created a scenario where both grants claimed the same strip of land, leading to subsequent legal disputes over ownership.
The overlapping claims led to continued legal battles, including the case of Bissell v. Henshaw, 85 U.S. 255 (1873), which reaffirmed the Boga patent as the legitimate one. Judge Stephen J. Field of the Supreme Court praised the clarity of the original Boga Grant documents, emphasizing their precision.
Throughout these legal proceedings, the Fernandez Grant faced challenges in establishing clear boundaries, while the Boga Grant's precise documentation provided a stronger case in court. This resolution underscores the importance of detailed legal descriptions and the complexities of transitioning land ownership from Mexican to American control.
Bissell v. Henshaw
The Henshaw-Bissell dispute involved a ferry license on the Feather River. On November 3, 1856, S. Y. Hale petitioned the Butte County Board of Supervisors for a ferry license across the Feather River near Oroville, asserting that the land on both riverbanks was public land. Despite opposition from nearby ferry operators, Hale's application, supported by witness J. L. Henshaw, was granted a six-month license on November 5, 1856. However, the Board did not verify crucial details such as the necessity of a ferry, the public land status, or Hale’s suitability, which laid the groundwork for future disputes.
In May 1857, Hale sought to renew his license, prompting Henshaw, along with Moore and Ord, to oppose the renewal and submit their own petition for the same ferry site, claiming ownership of the west bank land. The land's status shifted when the Fernandez grant was officially located, revealing that the previously assumed public land was privately owned. This revelation led to legal battles, and by fall 1859, Hale and other occupants were ejected from the west bank. The Board renewed Hale's license multiple times, ignoring ownership and procedural issues raised by Henshaw and others. In 1860, Henshaw escalated the dispute to the County Court, asserting that the Board had exceeded its jurisdiction and highlighting procedural deficiencies in granting Hale's licenses. The County Court's findings supported Henshaw, recognizing the ownership and procedural missteps, thus invalidating Hale’s license and underscoring the complexities of land ownership and local governance in early California.
Sutter Grant / New Helvetia
John Augustus Sutter was a Swiss-American immigrant who became a pivotal figure in California's early history. Sutter moved to the United States in 1834, eventually making his way to the West Coast via Missouri and Hawaii. By 1839, he had arrived in the Mexican province of Alta California, where he quickly ingratiated himself with the local authorities and began laying the foundations for his future endeavors.
On June 18, 1841, Juan Bautista Alvarado, then Governor of California, issued a land grant to John Sutter for the establishment of New Helvetia. This grant, known as New Helvetia (New Switzerland), was located near the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers. The land covered approximately 48,827 acres and was intended to establish a colony for Swiss immigrants. The boundaries were defined by prominent landmarks: Los Tres Picos (The Three Summits) to the north, the Feather River to the east, the Sacramento River to the west, and the parallel of 38°49'31" north latitude to the south. The grant explicitly excluded lands overflown by the swelling and currents of the rivers, referring to what are known as tule or swamp lands.
Sutter named his settlement "New Helvetia" and established Sutter's Fort, which became a central hub for commerce and agriculture in the region.
The validity of Sutter’s claim was initially confirmed by the Board of Commissioners created by Congress under the Act of March 3, 1851, to settle private land claims in California. This confirmation included both the eleven square leagues granted by Alvarado and an additional twenty-two square leagues granted by Governor Micheltorena in 1845. However, upon appeal, the United States Supreme Court upheld only the original eleven-square-league grant, rejecting the claim for the additional twenty-two leagues due to the circumstances under which it was issued.
A survey of the eleven leagues was carried out under the direction of the Surveyor General of California. This survey divided the land into two separate parcels: one of two leagues south of the American River and another of nine leagues along the Feather River. This division was in accordance with an earlier survey by John J. Vioget, made in 1840 or 1841, which predated Sutter’s formal application for the grant.
The initial survey was set aside by the district court, which directed a new survey that divided the eleven leagues into thirteen different tracts of varying dimensions. The intent was to reflect the various selections made by Sutter through settlement, lease, or sale. However, this fragmented survey was contested, leading to further appeals.
The United States Supreme Court eventually set aside this fragmented survey, reinstating the original survey conducted by Von Schmidt as the more accurate location of the grant. The court emphasized the necessity of compactness in the form of the land and conformity with public survey lines, ultimately approving the two-parcel division that best aligned with the historical records and the physical characteristics of the land.
Osio Grant / Rancho Aguas Frias
Rancho Aguas Frias, a 26,761-acre Mexican land grant, was given in 1844 by Governor Manuel Micheltorena to Antonio Maria Osio and his son Salvador Osio. The grant, named "cold water" in Spanish, extended along the west bank of Butte Creek and was bordered on the west by Rancho Llano Seco. Antonio Osio, also a grantee of Rancho Punta de los Reyes Sobrante, settled his son Salvador on Rancho Aguas Frias. Osio eventually sold the grant to Andrew Randall, an entrepreneur and geologist from Rhode Island who came to California in 1849. Randall's extensive land holdings and stretched credit led to a fatal encounter with creditor Joseph Hetherington in 1856.
After California Statehood, Andrew Randall filed a claim for Rancho Aguas Frias with the Public Land Commission in 1852. After Randall's death, Samuel Todd substituted for him, and the grant was patented to Todd in 1860. In 1859, Orville C. Pratt, a former federal judge from Oregon, purchased Rancho Aguas Frias and relocated to San Francisco in 1856.
Neals Ranch / Rancho Esquon
Rancho Esquon, also known as Neal's Rancho, was a 22,194-acre Mexican land grant, was awarded in 1844 by Governor Manuel Micheltorena to Samuel Neal, a Pennsylvania native and blacksmith who had joined John C. Frémont's second expedition. Located on the east bank of Butte Creek, the grant encompassed the areas of present-day towns of Durham, Esquon, Gridley, and Nelson. Neal, after a brief stint working for John Sutter, received the five square league grant and later mined gold on the Feather River at a place known as Neal's Diggins. After California Statehood, Neal filed a claim for Rancho Esquon with the Public Land Commission in 1852, and the grant was patented to him in 1860.
Upon Neal's death in 1859, he willed most of his land to Robert Waddell Durham, a partner in the Pony Express, who had settled in the area with his brother in 1852 and managed the ranch alongside Neal. Following Durham's death in 1871, and his brother William's death in 1873, their portion of Rancho Esquon was subdivided and sold. In 1868, R.W. Durham had sold 17,800 acres of the southern part of Rancho Esquon to George Gridley, a sheep rancher. Gridley later sold this land to E.B. Pond, John Boggs, and C.W. Clarke, who subsequently sold it to Leland Stanford in 1880. The Stanford-Durham Ranch eventually became the property of Stanford University.
Honcut Rancho
Rancho Honcut, a 31,080-acre land grant, was awarded in 1844 by Governor Micheltorena to Theodor Cordua, a German immigrant who had previously leased land from John Sutter. Located along the north bank of the Yuba River and bounded by the Feather River to the west and the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east, Rancho Honcut encompassed present-day Honcut and Ramirez. Cordua, who had established New Mecklenburg (now Marysville) on his leased land, sold half of his interest in Rancho Honcut to Charles Julian Covillaud in 1848. Covillaud, an early gold miner and husband to Mary Murphy, a survivor of the Donner Party, eventually gained full ownership of Rancho Honcut after a series of transactions involving partners Michael C. Nye, William M. Foster, José Manuel Ramirez, and Theodore Sicard.
A formal claim for Rancho Honcut was filed with the Public Land Commission in 1852 and the grant was officially patented to Covillaud & Co. in 1863.
Henrique Huber Grant
On February 11, 1845, Governor Manuel Micheltorena granted eight leagues of land to F. Huber, known as the Henrique Huber grant. After California Statehood, Henrique Huber filed a claim with the Public Land Commission on April 5, 1852. However, the Board rejected the claim on October 12, 1853, citing the absence of proven title and the indefinite description of the land. The case was further appealed, but the District Court upheld the rejection on August 5, 1863.
Cambuston Grant
The Cambuston Grant, which was finally resolved by the US Supreme Court in Cambuston v. United States (95 U.S. 285, 1877), involves a significant case concerning land grants in California following the transition from Mexican to U.S. governance. The grant was initially claimed by Eugene Cambuston based on a purported Mexican land grant, based on a document purportedly issued by Mexican Governor Pio Pico on May 23, 1846. The land in question was located on the upper waters of the Sacramento River, bounded by properties owned by Antonio Osio, John Sutter, and Mr. Flugge. The document, which was not accompanied by any supporting petition or investigation records, was deposited with Edward Canbey, Assistant Adjutant General of the U.S. Army, in July 1850. The claim was ultimately rejected by the U.S. Board of Land Commissioners on October 12, 1853, and this decision was affirmed by the District Court on August 5, 1863, due to insufficient evidence of a valid title and the indefinite description of the land. The Supreme Court, in its 1877 decision, upheld the rejection of Cambuston's claim by lower courts, citing insufficient evidence to substantiate the existence and legitimacy of the original grant.
