New Helvetia
New Helvetia ( Spanish Nueva Helvetia ; English New Helvetia ) was a private colony of the Swiss Johann August Sutter in Northern California , with a focus about 120 km northeast of San Francisco , which he founded in 1839 and the last parts of which he gave up in 1865.
definition
The term New Helvetia is mostly used without a detailed explanation of the content. In a broader sense, all lands in Northern California temporarily under the control of Johann August Sutter are meant. In a narrower sense, it concerns the properties selected by him on the basis of a Mexican land allocation on June 18, 1841, which the United States of America also granted him on June 20, 1866 under the title Rancho Nueva Helvetia .
The following properties are to be regarded as components of New Helvetia in the further definition:
- Mexican land allocation from June 18, 1841 (= New Helvetia in the narrower sense)
- Acquisition of Fort Ross and the associated port of Bodega Bay on December 13, 1841
- Mexican land allocation of February 5, 1845 (Rancho New Helvetia Sobrante)
- Land used by Sutter without legal title
Surname
It was common practice in Mexican land grants to give the properties a name, which usually began with the term rancho . Rancho was the term in Mexico that described an area with the associated properties mainly used for cattle breeding. The term xxx was used for arable land. Deviating from this, the official map sketch attached to the land allocation bears the name Mapa de los Terrenos Para la Colonia de Nueva Helvetia . In the later American case files, the term rancho is used again.
Sutter chose a modification of the Latin name for his home country Switzerland - Helvetia - as the name for his land allocation. The Mexican documents contain the form Nueva Helvetia and the corruption Nueva Elvesia . Due to the American, British and Russian interests on the Pacific coast of North America and at times French intentions, the choice of name should also demonstrate independence from these interests.
Because of these interests, there are also contemporary names for Nueva Helvetia in foreign languages. In addition to the English New Helvetia, also common after the US annexation of California, French Nouvelle-Helvétie, Russian Новая Гельвеция
history
On July 2, 1839, Sutter arrived by ship from Novo-Arkhangelsk ( Sitka ) in Russia , the port of Yerba Buena (as San Francisco was then called). California was a Mexican province.
Sutter's plan was to establish a settlement in the Sacramento River valley . Sutter wanted to avoid the coastal areas populated by Hispanic Californians, albeit sparsely, so as not to be exposed to their influence.
The Mexican governor Juan Bautista Alvarado advocated this, as he intended to use Sutter for his purposes. Firstly, his uncle Vallejo, who was in opposition to him, resided as military commander in Sonoma and Sutter's settlement was intended to form a counterpoint to this competitor. Second, Alvarado recognized the danger of American immigration from the east and wanted to put a stop to the Mexican coastal settlements and the United States of America by settling a European in the California Central Valley . Sutter posed as a Catholic and was able to make it credible that he was not pursuing the interests of the British, Russians or Americans.
The area of New Helvetia was not settled by the Spaniards until Sutter's arrival, but belonged to the settlement area of small Indian tribes, which are now grouped under the name Nisenan (= southern Maidu), but which never formed a tribal association and many different dialects ( Nisenan (Language) ) belonging to the Maidu languages .
Sutter received permission to settle in the Sacramento Valley as early as 1839 - before the land was allocated - and began building the main settlement of the colony on August 13, 1839 - later Fort Sutter near the confluence of the American River and the Sacramento River .
On August 29, 1840, Sutter received Mexican citizenship and on June 18, 1841 the desired land allocation. In the same year he acquired the Russian colonies of Fort Ross and Bodega Bay. The economic development of the colony suffered from a lack of credit, a shortage of workers and especially craftsmen, as well as bad harvests. Sutter tried to settle more people on his land, which was also a condition for the land allocation. Some of the land he sold, some of which were leased or transferred as wages for services.
After the Mexican-American War , New Helvetia fell to the USA in 1848 through the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, along with the rest of the territory of what is now the US state of California. In the same year the gold rush broke out. Like all entrepreneurs in California, the gold rush deprived him of his workforce, so that the harvests could no longer be brought in. Its buildings and plantations were damaged by the masses of undisciplined prospectors. In addition to these negative consequences, Sutter also experienced an enormous increase in the value of his property through immigration - especially in the area of what is now Sacramento City, which enabled him to pay his high debts. Due to his own economic ineptitude and wastefulness as well as fraud by employees and business partners, he lost a large part of the remaining assets. The cost of a year-long legal battle with the United States over his land grants and their partial deprivation drained the remaining wealth.
After his Hock Farm was destroyed by arson in 1865, he also sold this property and left California, with which New Helvetia became extinct.
The components of New Helvetia
New Helvetia in the narrower sense
The first Mexican land allocation ( grant ) from the Mexican governor Juan Bautista Alvarado to Sutter on June 18, 1841 did not determine clearly defined plots, but the size and rough boundaries of a territory within which the specific plots could be selected.
The rough limits were:
- In the north the “las tres picos” ( Sutter Buttes ) and the geographical latitude 39 ° 41 ′ 45 ″ north latitude, the exact position of this latitude in the wilderness of that time was unknown.
- In the east the banks ("las margenes") of the "Rio de las Plumas" ( Feather River )
- In the south the geographical latitude 38 ° 49 ′ 32 ″ north latitude, although the exact position of this latitude in the wilderness of that time was also unknown.
- To the west of the Sacramento River (not the banks here )
The first land allocation comprised the maximum area of 11 Sitio de ganado Mayor under Mexican law at the time , which in Mexico also meant 11 Legua cuadrada . According to the usual calculation in California, this corresponded to about 197.6 square kilometers, which is almost the area of today's city of Stuttgart .
Sutter chose a stretch of land that began around present-day Marysville and comprised properties north and south of the Yuba River within the territory of a total of about 33 Sitio (approx. 593 square kilometers) made available to him for settlement . From the confluence of the Yuba River with the Feather River , his land extended southward along the Feather River to its confluence with the Sacramento River and then along the Sacramento for about 5 miles beyond the confluence of the American River with the Sacramento River. The lands extended in the river valleys and on their terraces about 70 kilometers in a north-south direction and included parts of today's counties Yuba , Sutter and Sacramento .
In 1841 the surveyor Jean Jacques Vioget, who also came from Switzerland, created two map sketches for Sutter in which the rough boundaries and the properties selected by Sutter were recorded. In 1843 he made another copy with the addition of place names. These map sketches (Mexican: diseño) were part of the land allocation process. In the later American lawsuit between Sutter and the United States, copies of these map sketches were important evidence.
Sutter's main settlements were Sutter's Fort on the suburb of today's city of Sacramento in the south and the " Hock Farm " on the suburb of today's city of Yuba City in the north. The connection between the two was via a ferry that crossed the Feather River near what is now Nicolaus. Here, in 1842, Sutter had awarded his employee Nikolaus Allgeier from Bavaria a plot of one square mile as payment for his services.
In 1846 the city of Sutterville was founded about 4 kilometers south of the Embarcadero (landing stage) of Fort Sutter . Today Sutterville is just a California Historical Landmark and belongs to Sacramento. It was not until the end of 1848 that the city of Sacramento City was founded between the fort and the Embarcadero.
Fort Ross and Bodega Bay
Shortly after the land allocation in June 1841, Sutter bought the Russian-American trading company in December 1841, the California branch with the settlements in Fort Ross and the associated port of Bodega Bay . The Russians had the purchase price secured by a mortgage on New Helvetia.
There are two contracts for this purchase that differ significantly. An official contract was registered with the Mexican authorities dated December 13, 1841, containing an express clause that the land was not part of the purchase. According to the Mexican view, the Russians never had rights to the land, which is why no land sale contract could be registered by the Mexicans. However, registration was in the interests of the Russians because of the mortgage on New Helvetia.
In 1857 another treaty appeared on December 12, 1841 and signed by the last Russian governor of Fort Ross, Alexander Rotschew . A 12.6 kilometer wide coastal strip between Cape Mendocino and Punta de los Reyes was also sold to Sutter here. According to the Russian view, Spain (as Mexico's legal predecessor) never took possession of the area, which Russia did in 1812. In addition, in 1812 the land was informally bought by Russia from the Indians. On behalf of the Russian-American Company, Leonty Hagemeister concluded a contract with local Indian groups in 1817 to acquire the land required for the Fort Ross settlement. This subsequently confirmed the trade of 1812 in writing in 1817. According to this interpretation, Rotschew was able to legally sell the land to Sutter in 1841.
Fort Ross is about 150 kilometers west of Fort Sutter. Although, according to the Mexican view, the Russians had no ownership of the land they used and officially did not sell any land rights to Sutter, the latter had the properties continued to be used by his own administrators until 1845 and the Mexicans did not dispute this until then. Sutter had partially dismantled the buildings and had the material brought to Fort Sutter, as well as a large part of tools, weapons and uniforms. The herds of cattle had been partly overgrown and partly driven to his ranchos on the Feather and Sacramento Rivers. As Sutter's steward at Fort Ross, John Bidwell also worked for a time . From 1843 to 1845 Wilhelm Benitz worked as Sutter's administrator in Fort Ross and in 1845 as his tenant. On December 4, 1845, the Mexican government awarded the Muñez or Fort Ross Grant to Manuel Torres, from whom Benitz first leased the rancho and then bought it.
Sutter claimed the land ownership even after Mexico had given the land to Manuel Torres and received a payment from Benitz to compensate for his rights. The Mexican government awarded the southern part of the area (Bodega Grant) to Stephen Smith in April 1846. Sutter continued to claim ownership of the land here too. The legal disputes over the Russo-Sutter Title (Sutter's claims to Fort Ross and Bodega Bay) dragged on until 1860.
Rancho New Helvetia Sobrante
The second land allocation of February 5, 1845 by Governor Manuel Micheltorena included the land within the territory released for settlement in the first land allocation, which he could not initially claim for the first land allocation due to the legal limitation of 11 sitio at the time. It was awarded to him and his eldest son, Johann August Sutter jun., In 1845 as a second land allocation and referred to as Rancho Nueva Helvetia Sobrante or Rancho New Helvetia Sobrante .
Land use without legal title
Sutter had been planning to build grain mills and sawmills since 1840. James W. Marshall came to California via Oregon in 1845. He worked for the Swiss Johann August Sutter and was able to set up his own farm with his help. In the American-Mexican War he fought for a year in the volunteer battalion of John C. Frémont before returning to Sutter. Marshall was looking for a site to build a sawmill and on August 27, 1847, Sutter signed a contract with Marshall to build and operate the sawmill, with Marshall becoming a partner. The construction site was - far from Sutter's lands - about 60 kilometers northeast of Fort Sutter in the area of today's Coloma on the American River . The choice of the location was viewed with incomprehension by the neighbors, but no one was bothered by the unauthorized use of a site in the wilderness. The construction of the sawmill ( Sutter's Mill ) had progressed, but was still well before completion when Marshall came to Fort Sutter with the first gold discovery on January 28, 1848 - that was the beginning of the California gold rush .
Only now did Sutter try to obtain a legal title for the area around his sawmill. He initially leased it from the local Nisenan Indians for three years and then tried in vain to get a land assignment from the new American military governor Richard Barnes Mason .
Litigation
| August 24, 1821 | California Mexican Province | |
| August 13, 1839 | Foundation of Nueva Helvetia | |
| August 29, 1840 | Sutter Mexican citizen | |
| June 18, 1841 | first land allocation for Sutter | |
| February 5, 1845 | second land allocation for Sutter | |
| May 13, 1846 | Beginning of the Mexican-American War | |
| June 14, 1846 | California Republic proclaimed | |
| January 24, 1848 | Gold discovery at Sutter's Mill | |
| February 2, 1848 | Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo - Mexican-American War ended and California territory of the United States | |
| September 9, 1850 | California 31st state of the Union | |
| March 3, 1851 | Act to Settle Private Land Claims | |
| March 8, 1852 | Registration of Sutters Claim | |
| May 15, 1855 | Recognition of the claim by the Land Commission | |
| January 14, 1857 | Recognition of the claim by the federal court for Northern California | |
| December 1858 | partial recognition of the claim by the highest federal court | |
| July 5, 1859 | Supreme Court written notice to the Northern California Federal Court | |
| May 11, 1863 | Federal Court for Northern California will decide on details of the demarcation | |
| June 20, 1866 | Registration of land ownership | |
| 1866 | first petition to Congress | |
| 1876 | second petition to Congress | |
| June 16, 1880 | Bill not dealt with due to adjournment of Congress | |
| June 18, 1880 | † Sutter |
legal framework
In the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo , of the final point behind the American Mexican War -called war of conquest began, entered Mexico in 1848 u. a. from northern California to the United States. The property rights of Mexican citizens were expressly guaranteed in the treaty.
It was not until September 9, 1850 that California became the 31st state of the United States of America . On March 3, 1851, Congress passed the California Private Land Claims Act. The law introduced a three-step process that legal landowners in the US state of California under Spanish or Mexican law had to go through at their own expense in order to retain their land.
- Filing and substantiating the claim against the US Board of Land Commissioners. If this commission accepted the claim as justified, step 2 followed.
- Petition to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California . If, after reviewing the commission's decision, the federal judge approved the request, the United States would generally appeal and take the case (at the landowner's expense) to the Supreme Court.
- Decision of the Supreme Court of the United States
After the legal claim to the land had been clarified, it was necessary to measure the land - again at the landowner's expense. Due to the mostly vague description of the land allocations, there was often a lack of clarity about the detailed course of the border. After the survey was published, neighbors were still able to object.
In the case of Johann August Sutter's claims to New Helvetia, the proceedings began with Sutter's claim from 1852 and ended with the decision of the Supreme Court of 1858. Sutter then put the costs of the proceedings at 325,000 US dollars.
“Here, too, one must not forget that this process, like a thousand simultaneous ones, was only a continuation of the Mexican war.” Senator Daniel W. Voorhees came to the conclusion in 1880: “There is little doubt that Sutter's Sobrante letter was under the Mexican regime would have been confirmed; but under ours, the spirit of the homestead laws and the land presale laws created such an intense mood among the people against large land donations that even enforcement in the courts, unreasonably ... seems to have been affected. "
US Board of Land Commissioners
With the Act to Settle Private Land Claims in March 1851, the legal framework was created, but the commission did not begin its work until the beginning of 1852 and Sutter's claim was officially registered on March 8, 1852. The procedure before the Land Commission was documented in detail. On May 15, 1855, the Land Commission recognized Sutter's claim to the two donations.
District Federal Court of Northern California
On January 14, 1857, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California through Judge Ogden Hoffman Jr. Sutter upheld both land grants. The United States took the case to the Supreme Court, with Sutter bearing the costs.
With the written decision of the Supreme Court on July 5, 1859, which had decided the Sutter case in principle, the District Federal Court of Northern California was instructed to take over the further procedure for the precise determination of the property boundaries. The decision of the district court on the detailed specifications is dated May 11, 1863.
US Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of the United States dealt with the Sutter case in December 1858 and upheld the first land allocation (1841) while the second (1845) was rejected, with two minority judges also denying the validity of the 1841 land allocation. The case was referred back to the District Federal Court of Northern California in July 1859 to determine the exact property line.
Survey and registration
After the written decision of the Supreme Federal Court of July 5, 1859, the District Federal Court ordered an initial survey to precisely determine the property boundaries. The result was officially established on February 18, 1860. As a result, there were numerous objections by people who also made claims to parts of the country. The district federal court ordered a second measurement, the result of which was officially established on May 11, 1863. The United States and some private interested parties have now appealed to the Supreme Court again. In April 1865 the Supreme Federal Court rejected the second survey and determined that of February 18, 1860 as valid. The registration of his land rights (over 48,839.30 acres = 197.6 km²) did not take place until June 20, 1866. The US surveying service created a map of the land granted to him.
Californian pension
On April 4, 1864, both houses of the Californian Parliament granted Sutter a monthly pension of US $ 250 for five years as compensation for the injustice done to him and the inability of the state to protect him. This pension was later extended twice for two years each time and was finally discontinued in 1875.
petition
After his Hock farm in California burned down, Sutter and his wife moved to Washington, DC in December 1865. In 1866, he filed a petition with the United States Congress about the second land donation rejected by the Supreme Court and the injustice done to him by the Senate Committee on Claims should be dealt with. After still pending a decision on the petition in 1876, Sutter filed a new petition in 1876, recommended for acceptance by the House's Private Land Claims Committee , which provided compensation to Sutter of $ 50,000 - which was submitted however, never dealt with by the House of Representatives.
In 1880, Sutter, with the support of the Associated Pioneers of the Territorial Days of California, submitted another petition, which was approved by committees of the House and Senate in April 1880. In June Senator Daniel W. Voorhees launched a bill for Congress in line with the petition, but Congress adjourned on June 16 and there was no vote on Sutter's concerns - on June 18, 1880, Sutter died.
Sutter special case?
Contrary to the opinion widespread in German-speaking countries (“The Emperor of California”), the Mexican land allocation to Sutter was a relatively early and large one, but by no means a dominant one. Mexico issued about 800 land grants in Upper California, with a few exceeding 11 sitio. Sutter's land allocation in 1841 also only made up 0.5 per mille of California's land area.
After the annexation of California by the USA, 604 of 813 claims were recognized. The 813 claims related to an area of around 57,000 square kilometers, of which the 197 from Sutter accounted for around 3.5 per thousand.
Sutter's treatment by the US authorities was not particularly hostile, but was in keeping with the general practice of the American conquerors. Disappointed gold prospectors in California turned into land- hungry squatters whose political lobbyists fought against the Spanish-Mexican land grants and demanded land reform, so to speak.
literature
- Rachel Huber: "General Sutter", the obscure side of a Swiss hero story ; in: Swiss Journal for History (SZG) , Volume 69 No. 3, 2019, pp. 418–433.
- Albert L. Hurtado: John Sutter. A Life on the North American Frontier . University of Oklahoma Press, Norman OK 2006, ISBN 0-8061-3772-X, can be borrowed from the Internet Archive
- James Peter Zollinger: Johann August Sutter. King of New Helvetia. His life and his kingdom. NZZ libro, Zurich 2003, ISBN 3858230073 ; Individual references "Zollinger" with page number from James Peter Zollinger: Johann August Sutter. King of New Helvetia. In: Zürcher Illustrierte, Volume 14 (1938) - abridged version of the book publication. Links see under Wikisource.
- Heinrich Künzel: Upper California. A geographical description for the purpose of German emigration and settlement ... First contribution. With a map of the Rio Sacramento and a plan of Fort New Helvetia. , Darmstadt, CW Leske, 1848 digitized from Google - without map and floor plan; See the floor plan in the Internet Archive
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ When the lands were transferred to his son August on October 14, 1848, the following components are listed. Fort Ross was given with 6 square leagues = 105 square kilometers and Sutter's mill with 640 acres = 2.6 square kilometers. See Hurtado p. 238 in the Internet Archive
- ↑ Not as written in the city of Nueva Helve c ia in Uruguay.
- ^ Eugène Duflot de Mofras: Exploration du territoire de l'Orégon, des Californies et de la mer Vermeille exécutée pendant les années 1840, 1841 et 1842, Paris 1844, volume 1, p. 457 in the Internet Archive
- ^ Reprint of the Spanish original and the official English translation in the Supreme court of the United States. No. 135 .: The United States, appellants, vs. John A. Sutter. Appeal from the District court US for the Northern district of California. United States, Washington: Govt. print. off., 1863 ?, pp. 80–81 (English) and pp. 74–75 (Spanish) digitized
- ^ Decree of August 18th, 1824 respecting colonization. In: John W. Dwinelle: The colonial history of the city of San Francisco: being a synthetic argument in the District Court of the United States for the northern district of California, for four square leagues of land claimed by that city , 1863, Addenda No XII. on the Internet Archive - English translation of Mexican law
- ↑ Here a sitio = 4438.68 acres. There are numerous deviating area calculations for the legua quadrata in terms of space and time. Under Mexican law it was about smaller than calculated in the later American period, although a slightly different, smaller measure was also used here in Texas.
- ↑ The federal state of Bremen has 419 square kilometers and the Swiss canton of Basel-Land has 518 square kilometers
- ↑ In 1842 Sutter left the present urban area of Marysville to Theodor Cordua from Mecklenburg , who founded the "New Mecklenburg" settlement here . In 1850, about south of Marysville on the east bank of the Feather River, Sutter tried to found his own city, Eliza City, which he named after his daughter, but which could not hold up to Marysville and was soon abandoned.
- ^ Diseño del Rancho New Helvetia
- ↑ see the article in the English Wikipedia for his biography; the link is on the talk page.
- ↑ Today a California State Historical Landmark entry on the Office of Historic Preservation website; accessed on February 29, 2020
- ^ Entry on the website of the Office of Historic Preservation
- ^ Website History and Happenings; New Breisgau
- ^ English version printed by Clarence J. DuFour: The Russian Withdrawal from California. In: Quarterly of the California Historical Society, September 1933, pp. 269-270
- ↑ 3 Spanish leagues here converted from James N. Bowman: Weights and Measures of Provincial California. In: California Historical Society Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 4 (Dec., 1951), p. 325 jstor.org
- ↑ A SUMMARY OF THE TREATY BETWEEN RUSSIANS AND INDIANS SIGNED AT FORT ROSS IN 1817
- ^ An illustrated history of Sonoma County, California. Containing a history of the county of Sonoma from the earliest period of its occupancy to the present time by Lewis Publishing Company, Chicago 1889 in the Internet Archive
- ^ Website History and Happenings; New Breisgau
- ↑ The possibility of assigning more than 11 sitio at a later point in time was opened up in Mexican law by the General rules and regulations for the colonization of territories of the republic of Mexico, November 21, 1828. In: John W. Dwinelle: The colonial history of the city of San Francisco: being a synthetic argument in the District Court of the United States for the northern district of California, for four square leagues of land claimed by that city , 1863, Addenda No XIV. in the Internet Archive - English translation of the Mexican Law
- ↑ sobrante means remnant in Spanish
- ↑ see Zollinger p. 1353
- ↑ see Zollinger p. 1378
- ↑ Article VIII of the Treaty of
- ↑ Act to Settle Private Land Claims in 1851, March 3 - 09 Stat. 631 digitalcommons
- ↑ see James Peter Zollinger: Johann August Sutter. King of New Helvetia. In: Zürcher Illustrierte , Volume 14 (1938), Issue 48, 12. Continuation and conclusion, p. 1480 e-periodica . Converting the purchasing power of this $ 325,000 from approx. 1860 to 2020 results in a value of approx. 10 million dollars. Conversions over such a long time are always problematic. Here the conversion was done via www.in2013dollars.com; accessed on February 7, 2020
- ↑ James Peter Zollinger: Johann August Sutter. King of New Helvetia. In: Zürcher Illustrierte , Volume 14 (1938), Issue 48, 12. Continuation and conclusion, p. 1480 e-periodica
- ↑ James Peter Zollinger: Johann August Sutter. King of New Helvetia. In: Zürcher Illustrierte , Volume 14 (1938), Issue 48, 12. Continuation and conclusion, p. 1487 e-periodica
- ^ 1862 - Reports of Land Cases Determined in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Volume 1, Ogden Hoffman, District Judge (2016). Miscellaneous Documents and Reports. 16. APPENDIX: TABLE OF LAND CLAIMS, Presented to the Commission pursuant to the provisions of the Act OF Congress of March 3d, 1851, entitled "An Act to Ascertain AND Settle the Private Land Claims in the State of California." Claim 92, p. 13 digitalcommons
- ^ The Sutter claim, the evidence taken in Case 192 before the Board of US Land Commissioners, together with the brief of the United States land agent. Sacramento 1854 hathitrust
- ↑ James Peter Zollinger: Johann August Sutter. King of New Helvetia. In: Zürcher Illustrierte , Volume 14 (1938), Issue 47, 11th continuation, p. 1451 e-periodica
- ↑ see Zollinger p. 1480
- ^ Supreme court of the United States. No. 135 .: The United States, appellants, vs. John A. Sutter. Appeal from the District court US for the Northern district of California. Washington DC 1863, pp. 277-278 hathitrust
- ^ Supreme court of the United States. No. 135 .: The United States, appellants, vs. John A. Sutter. Appeal from the District court US for the Northern district of California. Washington DC 1863, p. 973 hathitrust
- ^ A publication of the judgment can be found in the Sacramento Union of April 1, 1859 United States Supreme Court. Decision in the Sutter case. pdf
- ↑ United States v. Sutter, 62 US 170 (1858) to JUSTITIA US Supreme Court; Summary
- ↑ United States v. Sutter, 62 US 170 (1858) to JUSTITIA US Supreme Court; case
- ↑ see Sacramento Union of April 13, 1865, The Sutter Survey. pdf
- ↑ Staff of the State Lands Commission: Grants of Land in California made by Spanish or Mexican Authorities , 1982, p. 158 digitized
- ^ Plat of the New Helvetia Rancho, finally confirmed to John A. Sutter: [Sacramento Valley, Calif. / Surveyed under instructions from the US Surveyor General; by AW from Schmidt, Depy. Survr. ; and EH Dyer, Depy. Survr on calisphere.] This map from May 1863 shows 48,847.28 acres as Sutter's property, with reference to the still outstanding detailed survey for some properties. This explains the minimal difference to the 48,839.3 acres registered in 1866.
- ^ California. Legislature. Assembly. (18621939). The Journal of the Assembly, during the fifteenth session of the Legislature of the State of California.
- ^ California. Legislature. Senate., California. Legislature. Assembly. (1850). Journal of the Senate of the State of California. Sess. 15 (1863-1864). P. 695
- ^ Petion of John A. Sutter. In: Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 30, Number 4648, February 14, 1866
- ^ Memorial of John A. Sutter to the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, in Congress assembled. Washington DC 1876 hathitrust
- ↑ see the information in Acres at PW Gates: California Claims Rich and Vast. In: History of Public Land Law Development , Washington DC 1978, pp. 115-117, can be borrowed from the Internet Archive
Coordinates: 38 ° 34 ′ N , 121 ° 28 ′ W