elicited. But the next day, on motion of Hall, the committee was dissolved; and the subject for the time was dropped.'

Two attempts to impeach district judges were made at this session of the legislature. The first was in the case of Levi Parsons, judge of the district court of the fourth judicial district, who was charged with unjust, oppressive and unlawful conduct in committing William Walker for alleged contempt of court, as has been already stated. After much controversy and taking of testimony, the assembly finally on motion of Baldwin determined, by a vote of seventeen ayes to twelve noes, that the testimony adduced did not sustain the charges or warrant any impeachment. The second was the case of William R. Turner, judge of the district court of the eighth judicial district, who was charged with much the same kind of conduct towards Stephen J. Field. In this case too, there was much controversy and testimony, and the matter occupied considerable attention; but finally, on motion of Thorne, it was indefinitely postponed by a vote of fifteen ayes to twelve noes. Subsequently, on motion of John Bigler, the testimony in both these cases of attempted impeachment, like that in reference to bribery and corruption in reference to the water-lot bill, was ordered erased from the journals of the legislature and filed in the office of the secretary of state."

When McDougal on January 9, 1851, became governor to serve out the unexpired term of Burnett, there was of course a vacancy in the office of president of the senate. This was filled on the same day by the election of David C. Broderick, who continued to fill the position for the remainder of the session. John Bigler was speaker of the assembly, to which office he was elected on the first day of the session, January 6. Each made a good presiding officer and each at the end of the session received a vote of thanks for the able and impartial manner in which he had acted. It was still the custom of members to smoke tobacco in the legislative halls; but on March 27, John Cook in the assembly offered a resolution providing, among other things, that whereas order and decorum were not observed, and whereas

1 Journals of Legislature, 1851, 1581–1586.

2 Journals of Legislature, 1851, 1374, 1638, 1646, 1813.

the house had no rule prohibiting smoking during business hours, and whereas this improper practice was indulged in to a disreputable extent, not only by members but others who had privileges within the bar, therefore it should be the duty of the speaker to forbid any person from smoking during the sessions. A motion to indefinitely postpone was defeated by sixteen to eleven, when John S. Bradford offered as a substitute a simple resolution that smoking should not be permitted within the hall during sessions of the assembly. The next day a motion to indefinitely postpone the whole subject was lost by a vote of fourteen to thirteen; but a motion to lay both the resolution and substitute on the table prevailed by a vote of seventeen ayes to eleven noes-and there they continued to lie. In the senate on the contrary, though not until April 17, near the end of the session, it was on motion of Pablo De la Guerra ordered that neither smoking nor chewing should be allowed within the bar of the senate during the remainder of the session.'

Both Broderick and Bigler made a few valedictory remarks in their respective houses at the end of this legislature. Bigler reviewed the work that had been done and said that over two hundred bills had been reported and received first and second readings, of which about one hundred and twenty had been passed and approved. Many very exciting and highly important questions had been considered and determined. Their discussions had been marked by one or two occurrences of a rather unpleasant character, but explanations perfectly satisfactory to all concerned had followed and good feeling was speedily restored. He said that the session had been longer than expected; but it might be said in justification that no legislative body had ever in one session disposed of so many important measures. Much of the legislation of the previous session had been reviewed; many laws then approved had been repealed and others, more in accordance with the necessities of the people, matured and passed. The judicial and revenue systems of the state had been revised and many important changes made. A judicious system of common schools had been formulated and ample provision made for the indigent sick by the establishment of hospitals at Journals of Legislature, 1851, 48, 418, 778, 1442, 1452.

important points in the state. Such were Bigler's declarations; but it is to be remarked that he was only partly right in them. and therefore partly wrong. He was wrong in comparing the work of 1851 with that of 1850 and wrong in intimating that it was more important or better done than that of 1850. He was wrong in stating that there had been a judicious system of common schools devised or ample provision made for the indigent sick. But he was right in saying that much important work had been done and that, considering the importance and exciting character of many of the measures discussed, the deliberations of the assembly had been characterized by generally good feeling.'

The legislature of 1851 had scarcely adjourned before public attention began to be attracted to the election of a new legislature and a complete set of new state officers. By an amendment of the recent session, the general election was to take place on the first Wednesday in September, which was little more than five months distant. Political parties can hardly be said to have been as yet fully formed or organized. There were a great many Democrats or men who called themselves Democrats in the country, and almost as many Whigs; but the differences between the two were recollections brought from the Atlantic states of issues of a couple of years previous, rather than active and living issues of the day. The intense and bitter differences between the Republicans and Democrats of a few years afterwards, and particularly during the civil war, were as yet unknown. The question of slavery had not become of absorbing interest. Though the Republican party of a later day was to a great extent the successor of the Whig party of the time of Henry Clay, the Whig party of Henry Clay's time embraced many of the most decided pro-slavery men; while the Democratic party of that time contained many men who became active and persistent Republicans. Almost all were more or less violently opposed to abolition and anti-slavery agitation. An attempt was made to excite a contest on the old political issues and to stir up what might be called a regular old-time Whig and Democratic fight; but though conventions were held and tickets Journals of Legislature, 1851, 1804.

nominated under the old names, the strife was rather between persons than measures; and only occasionally were glimpses to be caught of the deep-down, underlying fundamental questions of paramount interest, which were looming up and as it were dimly casting the shadows of coming events before them.

At their respective conventions held not long after the adjournment of the legislature, the Democrats nominated John Bigler for governor and Samuel Purdy for lieutenant-governor, while the Whigs nominated Pearson B. Reading for governor and Drury P. Baldwin for lieutenant-governor. The election took place on September 3, 1851. Afterwards on January 8, 1852, when the next legislature met in convention for the purpose of counting the votes, Henry A. Crabb of the assembly called attention to the fact that the clerks of some of the counties had not complied with either the constitution or the laws in reference to the sealing up and transmission of the returns, thereby giving rise to doubts as to their correctness; and he therefore moved the appointment of a special committee, with power to send for persons and papers, to examine the returns and report upon them. The motion was, however, laid upon the table by a vote of sixty-five ayes to sixteen noes. The returns were then canvassed; and it appeared therefrom that Bigler had received fifteen thousand six hundred and fourteen undisputed and seven thousand five hundred and sixty disputed votes, and Reading fifteen thousand two hundred and forty-four undisputed and seven thousand four hundred and eighty-nine disputed votes; while Purdy had received sixteen thousand four hundred and sixty-four undisputed and seven thousand nine hundred and thirty-four disputed, and Baldwin thirteen thousand seven hundred and thirty-two undisputed and seven thousand two hundred and twenty-seven disputed votes. The tellers thereupon reported the majority of Bigler for governor as three hundred and seventy undisputed and seventy-one disputed votes and that of Purdy for lieutenantgovernor as two thousand seven hundred and thirty-two undisputed and seven hundred and seven disputed votes. No attempt was made to ascertain whether a correct consideration of the disputed votes might not change the result; and accordingly

6 VOL. IV.

Bigler and Purdy were declared the duly elected governor and lieutenant-governor of the state for the ensuing two years.1

The legislature of 1852 convened, in accordance with the recent act for the permanent location of the seat of government, at Vallejo on Monday, January 5. The senate, which among its newly elected members embraced James W. Denver, James M. Estell, Philip W. Keyser, Joseph C. McKibben, Philip A. Roach, Frank Soulé and Royal T. Sprague, was called to order by Broderick, the president of the last senate. Tingley at once presented a protest against the organization of the legislature at Vallejo, basing his objections chiefly on the same grounds urged by him at the recent session against the law and on the further grounds that Mariano G. Vallejo had not complied with his contract; that the law was conditioned upon such compliance and ineffective until then, and that any and all legislation done at Vallejo previous to a full compliance with the law would be wholly nugatory. This protest, which was also signed by Frank Soulé, was entered on the journal. It was followed two days afterwards and just before Bigler was inducted into office by a somewhat similar protest from Governor McDougal. He declared that the legislature was required by the constitution and laws to convene at the seat of government; that Vallejo was not yet the seat of government because the law removing it from San José had not been complied with for the reason, among others, that the buildings at Vallejo had by the agent appointed to report thereon been shown to be not so good as those occupied by state officers at San José, and that therefore San José still remained the seat of government. But the senate was little disposed to hear from the retiring governor and promptly, on motion of Van Buren, laid his protest on the table, where it remained.2

McDougal's first and only annual message was presented to the legislature on January 7, 1852, at the same time that he sent in his protest before referred to. In this document he congratulated the state that its admission as one of the United States had had the effect to a great extent at least of quieting the agitation