Homesteading - A Short History

Michael C. Grifantini and Charles L. Hornbeck

Introduction

The Shasta County Homestead Declaration database allows a person to easily access historical information from the period 1861-1942. However, a cursory glimpse the information contained within the database might cause some confusion. For instance, a person may ask: what is a Homestead Declaration and is it the same as a Homestead Claim? The user may also be curious about why the database also contains "Abandonment of Homesteads" and "Setting Aside of Homesteads". What are these documents? Other question might concern the variety of ways the properties' locations were described—sometimes by a
lot number, other times by survey description, and still others where geographical features are used. To best answer these and other questions, and to make the Homestead Declaration database easier, more meaningful, and more fun to use, this short history of homesteading in Shasta County (and all of the American West) is offered.

The Desire to Own Land

The desire to own land is a corner-stone of American history and development. Many of the immigrants to our country, and to the American West, made the move with the hope of owning land and becoming prosperous. This land-owning desire should be viewed within the context of the history and psychology of the immigrating people of the time. A large portion of the early immigrants to American came from Western Europe. At that time the working-class in Europe had little hope of owning land. These societies offered only a few options for the lower classes: work at a trade, work for a landowning person (usually rich), or immigrate to another country having greater opportunities. Many chose the later option, frequently those people with high hopes, with little to lose, and with strong personal aspirations. It can not be overstated that America's society was created by people having a deep-seated belief in the relationship between owning land, having some control over one's own destiny, and potential personal prosperity.

As immigrants arrived in America and fanned out, many found that the opportunity to own land was not as easy as they had originally hoped. Much of the better land in the East and Midwest was already taken or had inherent problems (lowland flooding or malaria infestations were very common in eastern America). In addition, economic "Panics" erupted from time to time, leaving new immigrants to continue searching for something better. News continued to filter from west to east, telling of the riches existing in California, whether being fertile farmland, healthy climate, or gold. The stories encouraged many people to continue their westward push, either across the hazardous trails across the Plains, deserts, and Sierras or via disease-prone Central America.

America's Efforts to Distribute Public Land

The framers of our Constitution and later law-makers understood the immigrant's desire to own land--and they encouraged it in many ways. (After all, many of the founding fathers had come to America for the very same reasons and with the same dreams.) It was generally perceived that a nation of landowners would be more stable than one in which only a few rich owned land. Land ownership was viewed as the best way to create a financially-stable middle-class. Incidentally, as time passed the distribution of public land to private individuals also became intertwined with the slavery issue. Anti-slavery lawmakers encouraged families to move to areas not yet within an established State. By building the territories' population with an anti-slavery population it was hoped that when a new State was created it would enter the Union as "Free". Of course, slavery-supporters advocated the same settlement strategy but encouraged different-minded people and hoped for different statehood
results.

In the mid-1800s the American West was land-rich but settler-poor. After America acquired California from the Mexican government and American Indians, most land fell under the control of the federal government. The federal government experimented with a variety of ways to disperse the land, culminating in a series of Homestead Acts. These Acts were based upon the notion of "preemption" (referring to the establishment of the rights to a given piece of land due to being
the first one living on it and claiming it). Several federal Homestead Acts were passed with the most well-known dating from 1862. In addition many states, including California, enacted their own Homestead laws. (The earliest Shasta County Homestead Declarations refer to the 1851 State Homestead Act and 1858 Amendment.)

How Land Was Homesteaded

The general requirements and procedures for individuals or families to homestead a parcel of public land included:

• 1) To build a house on a parcel of unclaimed land, usually not exceeding 160-acres (although the size changed depending on the individual's marriage status and time-period the homesteading occurred);
• 2) To determine and describe the land's boundaries;
• 3) To live on the land for a prescribed length of time;
• 4) To pay the applicable fees; and
• 5) To record the Homestead with the applicable Government Land Office.

Two square miles within each 36 square mile block was set aside for the public school systems, as a form of financial endowment. These sections of land (Sections number 16 and 36) were exempt from homesteading.

It was up to the Land Office to determine if the land was being occupied and developed, as required by law. (Shasta County's local Land Office was in Marysville and early Homestead Declarations occasionally refer to the original Homestead Claims being filed at that location. Shasta County Historical Society is not in possession of these Homestead Claims.) After making a Homestead Claim, some landowners took another step, to file a Homestead Declaration with the applicable County. The Homestead Declaration database user needs to understand that County Homestead Declarations are not the same as Homestead Claims. The Declarations are merely the part of the homesteading process that legally files a given Homestead with the appropriate County and requesting certain legal guarantees. (These guarantees will be described later in this history.) It is very possible that many Homestead Claims existed without the applicant ever filing a Homestead Declaration.

The Need to Accurately Describe Homestead Lands - A History of Shasta County Land Surveys

Obviously, with many people entering California and most desiring to own land, it was very important to be able to accurately determine where the land was located. Without a clear land description confusion would certainly occur, leading to legal conflict or worse! In the eastern United States, as early as 1785, a system was conceived that eventually was adopted throughout America. It consisted of surveys beginning at a known starting point (the Meridian) and progressing out from that point, north, south, east, and west. All the land was surveyed into six mile by six mile square grids called Townships. Each Township was subdivided into 36 "Sections", each one being approximately one mile square. The corners of each Section were marked on the ground with as permanent a structure as was available. Each individual one square mile Section was subdivided into quarters, with the corners also marked permanently on the ground. Finally, the trees along the boundaries of the Sections were blazed, so that they were easy to find and follow.

Each Township was given a unique sequential number which increased as one traveled from northward from the Meridian (being called North Townships) and increasing as one traveled southward from the Meridian (being called South Townships). Likewise, as surveys extended east or west from the Meridian, each Township was given a different and unique Range number. Similarly to the case of Township numbering, Range numbers increased from the Meridian headed west (termed West Ranges) and increased numerically as one traveled east from the Meridian (East Ranges). Using this system, once the Townships, Ranges, and Section lines were established on the ground, all land could be accurately and uniquely described with a Township, Range, and Section (and part-section) written description. (An example of a legal description using this procedures and frequently seen in the Homestead Declaration database would be: T.30N., R.3E., Section 22 (NE _). This means that the Homestead is located in the 30th Township North of the Base Meridian and in the 3rd Range East of the Base Meridian. Within this 36-square mile Township, the land would be located in Section number 22 and consist of the North-eastern _ of that Section.) An important land sub-division with this survey procedure is the quarter Section, which not accidentally, was the amount of land many Homesteading Acts allowed a family to homestead (160-acres).

In northern California, Township surveys were initiated in 1850, immediately after statehood. Survey by federal employees began at the summit of Mt. Diablo Meridian, in the Bay Area. Land considered most likely to be homesteaded, either potential farm or ranch land, was the highest priority and was surveyed first. The land with less settlement value, such as mountainous terrain, was initially skirted and surveyed at a later time. By 1852 surveyors had worked northward in the Sacramento Valley as far as Red Bluff and by 1860 land in the Cow Creek lowlands, east of modern-day Redding, were surveyed as well as the Bald Hills vicinity west of Cottonwood. The surveyors, hard pressed to keep up with the homesteaders desiring agricultural land, skipped north to Shasta, Scott, and Butte Valleys (Siskiyou County), before returning again to complete Shasta County's non-agricultural land.

A large influx of people arrived in Shasta County due to the Gold Rush, beginning in 1849. Several major communities sprang up immediately but prior to completion of federal Township surveys, including: Horsetown, Shasta, and French Gulch. These communities were also located outside prime agricultural zones; consequently, they did not receive early federal Township surveys. To enable settlers to acquire and sell land in these situations, with a minimum of confusion and disagreement, an alternative means was used to establish and describe land--the so-called "metes and bounds" surveys. With this procedure, property corners were described (such as blazed trees, stream courses, constructed rock cairns, and abutting landowner's property) and the distances and bearings between these features were recorded. Often in these surveys a land parcel's written description referred to passing along the boundary of the adjacent landowner's lot. (In the 1860s, Homestead Declarations in all of the existing communities of Shasta County used metes and bounds descriptions rather than Township, Range, and
Section descriptions.)

Although better than nothing, metes and bounds descriptions obviously could lead to many problems. Blazed trees could disappear (or be burned or cut); streams could and did change course; and adjacent property owners might disagree about exactly where the property boundary really was! These potential problems stressed the need for some better way to determine
land boundaries until the federal Township surveys could cover the entire County. The solution was community surveys, which along with their maps, were filed with the County. These maps documented the location and size of all lots in the communities and gave each lot a unique number that could be easily referred rather than having to use long metes and bounds descriptions. The first community survey was completed in 1871 for Shasta, by William Magee. Shortly after that French Gulch and Fall River Mills were surveyed and mapped in a like-manner. (Following completion of the community surveys Homestead Declarations in these towns tended to get away from metes and bounds descriptions and referred to Lot Number and the date of the map [plat] filed with the County.) The City of Redding (occasionally spelled "Reading" in its earliest days) was established as the new County Seat, replacing Shasta, in 1881. The vicinity surrounding the rail station was laid out in a block and lot grid, surveyed, and mapped. The same plat procedure was also used for the communities of Anderson and Cottonwood. As Redding and the other communities grew beyond their original platted designs, "Additions" were added to the communities, surveyed, and platted. (Beginning in the mid-1880s many Homestead Declarations in Redding, Cottonwood, and Anderson refer to a Lot and Block number, along with the Addition's name.)

The Rancho Buena Ventura (a.k.a. P. B. Reading Grant) represents a unique situation within Shasta County and deserves some discussion. Rancho Buena Ventura was an early Mexican Land Grant dating back to 1843. It was granted to P.B. Reading by Mexican Governor Micheltorena and John Sutter, his alcalde. The Rancho extended from the mouth of Cottonwood Creek north to Salt Creek, a short distance upstream from current-day Redding. P.B. Reading contracted with a private surveyor (Ralph Norris) to establish the Rancho's boundaries and to establish sub-divisions, with the work being completed between 1853 and 1856. In other words, the survey of the Rancho took place several years before the federal Township survey reached the vicinity. The private Rancho Buena Ventura survey did not follow metes and bound procedures nor did they use the federal Township survey protocol. The Rancho was surveyed into 72 "sections" and subdivision lines were not based upon cardinal directions (north, south, east, or west)! Years later, when the public land Township survey passed around the Reading Grant land, it described the location of the property boundaries in relationship to the Township survey; however, it did not attempt to re-survey Rancho using the public land procedure. Eventually, the Reading family lost the Rancho Buena Ventura through legal actions and it was sold. (Many of the Homestead Declarations for land located between Cottonwood and Redding refer to the Reading Grant and Rancho Buena Ventura and to the private survey sub-divisions. That is why there are references to "sections" as high as 46 or 72 without any reference to Townships or Ranges.)

By 1895 all of Shasta County was surveyed and broken down into Townships, Ranges, and Sections. To accomplish this daunting task, in the 1870-80s the federal government turned to private contractors to do much of the surveys in Shasta County and throughout California. Although many surveys were of good quality, others were subsequently found to be poorly-done or fraudulent. In some cases the surveys were never done on the ground and fictitious information was entered in survey notes. Sometimes, Township and Section corners were not permanently placed, and Section lines not blazed. Much of this malfeasance was conducted by the so-called "Benson Syndicate", based out of San Francisco. It is a fascinating story with strong indications of conspiracy between the surveyors, major banks and railroad companies, and even members of Congress. The goal was to not only make money on the poorly-conducted surveys but, more importantly, to gain illegal control of large amounts of high-quality land. While the Benson Syndicate is a story unto itself, for the purpose of understanding the history of homesteading, it is probably sufficient to note that many problems have fallen on landowners due to poorly-done or fraudulent land surveys.

As mentioned before, not all land in Shasta County was open for homesteading. Two separate Sections within each Township were allotted to the schools (Sections number 16 and 36). These Other lands not open for homesteading included the alternate Sections granted to railroad companies on either side of their rail-line. (Eventually, most of these school and railroad lands were sold to other parties.)

Homesteading as a Legal Process to Avoid Foreclosure

Generally, our notion of a "homestead" is of a 160-acre ranch or farm; however, many Shasta County Homestead Declarations are for relatively small residentual lots or even places of business. To understand why this is so, it is important to
realize that homesteading was not only a way to acquire land cheaply. There is also a legal concept embedded within the homesteading process which exempts the landowner from many types of claim or lien, if the homesteading family ran into severe financial problems. The logic that probably prompted the federal government to allow this legal exemption may have again stemmed from our historical experiences in Europe. There, debtors could be stripped of all their possessions and
placed in prisons or left homeless and destitute. It is probable that many immigrants had first-hand knowledge of friends, family, or acquaintances that suffered this fate. By allowing a homestead foreclosure exemption, Congress was offering some protection to citizens that became insolvent, and theoretically gave them a sense of security in being able to have a second chance to put their financial house in order.

Because a family could only claim one homestead exemption, it is common to find situations were the landowners filed a Homestead Declaration, and then later filed an Abandonment of Homestead. At some future date, it is common to find that the family filed another Homestead Declaration for a different land parcel. This suggests that the family sold the original land and "abandoned" the Homestead Declaration for that property so that the new owner could assert their rights for that land. (Some Shasta County Homestead Declarations are recorded as "Setting Aside of Homesteads". These legal actions apparently occurred in one of two situations. In the first case, if a parcel's legal owner, usually a male, died and his family members wished to retroactively declare Homestead status. One can understand that when a husband died in the settlement era the entire family was often placed in financial jeopardy and legal council may have advised that such a retroactive Homestead Declaration be filed to protect their home. The second situation where "Setting Aside of Homesteads" were used seems to be related to family bankruptcy proceedings. In these cases, "insolvent debtor's" families with existing Homesteads were applying
for foreclosure exemption for their land.

Considered in historical context, the notion of private land ownership, conveying public land to private individuals, and some form of protection from legal actions are all very important aspects in the development of Western America.

Conclusion

With this short historical perspective in mind, information within the Homestead Declarations can be put in context. The Declarations, when viewed in their entirety from 1861-1942, also give a fascinating
overview of the manner in which Shasta County developed. Specifically, they show the earliest settlement patterns —as the communities of Shasta, French Gulch, and Horsetown developed; then the slow settlement of agricultural areas in central (Cow Creek drainage) and eastern Shasta County (Burney and Fall River Valleys). As transportation infrastructure developed, the communities of Redding, Anderson, and Cottonwood begin to grow rapidly—in fact, as time goes on greater and greater percentages of Homestead Declarations are located in communities, rather than rural areas, showing the trend toward urban development. Finally, one sees the short-lived existence of once-flourshing mining towns such as Copper City, Kennett, South Park, and Sallee in the early 1900s (all now either under or near Shasta Reservoir). We wish you good luck using the Homestead Declaration database. Have fun!.