|
The Mussel Slough Tragedy was a dispute over land titles between settlers and the Southern Pacific Railroad (SP) that took place on May 11, 1880, on a farm located northwest of Hanford, California, in the central San Joaquin Valley, leaving seven people dead. Frank Norris' 1901 novel, ''The Octopus: A Story of California'', was inspired by this incident, as was W. C. Morrow's 1882 novel ''Blood-Money''. May Merrill Miller's novel, ''First the Blade'', includes a fictionalized account of the conflict. The exact history of the incident has been the source of some disagreement, largely because popular anti-railroad sentiment in the 1880s made the incident to be a clear example of corrupt and cold-blooded corporate greed. Muckraking journalists and anti-railroad activists glorified the settlers and used the events as evidence and justification for their anti-corporate crusades.〔Beers, p. 2〕 The site of the episode is now registered as California Historical Landmark #245.〔California Office of Historic Preservation〕 A historical marker on the east side of 14th Avenue, 350 yards (320 m) north of Elder Avenue, memorializes the site.〔J.L. Brown, p. 65〕 ==Background== The region known in the late 19th century as the Mussel Slough country was mostly in what was then Tulare County, California, with a small portion in what was then Fresno County (later the entire area became part of Kings County after the latter was formed in 1893). The Mussel Slough country took its name from a slough which went from the Kings River to Tulare Lake. This area had remained unsettled as it was a broad, dry plain suitable only for cattle ranching. However, in 1866 Congress authorized the railroad companies to build a line through the area, and created numbered lots of each. The Southern Pacific Railroad (SP) received the odd-numbered sections of land, totaling about worth. The even-numbered sections were given to homesteaders by the government and were not subject to the events which followed.〔R. Brown, p. 95〕 Given SP's history of encouraging settlement and development along its lines, land prices were expected to appreciate considerably.〔R. Brown, p. 96〕 Settlers, who had spent a great deal of money and time in building their houses and farms, had begun to file for homesteads in the area on the railroad lands starting in 1869, in anticipation of the completion of the line. In 1872, the Central Pacific Railroad completed work to Goshen from the north and the Southern Pacific was to construct the southern portion (although not generally known by the public at the time, the two railroad systems were owned and operated by the same people although they were technically separate corporations〔J.L. Brown, p. 26〕). The SP's brochures had stated the price of the land would be "$2.50 per acre and upwards",〔Roberts, p. 79〕 leading many people to mistakenly believe that $2.50/acre was a set price. Furthermore, other brochures indicated that any improvements the settlers made to the land would not be counted when the prices were fixed.〔 However, when the settlers attempted to acquire their land, the asking price was significantly greater than that, which SP attributed to rising property values because of the laying of the railroad, although many settlers believed it was due to their own improvements such as irrigation, housing, fences, and barns.〔Beers, p. 3〕〔Gomes〕 Settlers protested against the railroads, but to no avail. A bill in the United States Congress that would have fixed the price at $2.50/acre failed to pass. The Southern Pacific then filed and won a lawsuit in 1878 against the settlers, amidst allegations of court bias (former California Governor Leland Stanford was also president of SP).〔 While the issue was still pending in court, the SP decided to change the course of the route, claiming that was its prerogative, despite the Department of the Interior having already granted homestead rights. Those who had been building homes along the previous course were distraught. Settlers argued in court that by not building the line where the federal government had deeded the land, SP forfeited the title. On the other hand, the SP was convinced of its legal ownership of the land and felt it should have the freedom to set whatever prices it deemed fit for its property.〔R. Brown, pp. 96–7〕 Others took the opportunity to move ''onto'' the SP's parcels, anticipating that the courts would rule against the company, thus allowing them to get the land for free.〔Orsi, p. 96〕 The Supreme Court finally ruled in ''Schulenberg v. Harriman'' 21 Wall. 44 (1874) that SP still owned the lands and as such, the SP was justified to reclaim the land without compensation unless the settlers were willing to pay their asking price, now up to $35/acre.〔 Still, the Settler's League, which was formed in 1878 in opposition to the SP's Mussel Slough actions,〔 even attempted to appeal directly to President Rutherford B. Hayes during his visit to San Francisco in 1880,〔''The New York Times'', September 12, 1880〕 presenting him a petition which read, Besides the 1874 Supreme Court ruling, a critical moment came on December 15, 1879, when Judge Lorenzo Sawyer of the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in ''Orton'', 32 F. 457 (C.C.D. Cal. 1879), that the federal government controlled the railroad land grants, and more importantly, the state could not control ''ultra vires'' acts of corporations.〔Draffan. Sawyer was criticised at the time for bias, as he owned shares in the SP, but the reasoning was upheld as sound on appeal. This was one in a series of court rulings that defined the legal nature of business, culminating in the landmark 1886 case ''Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad'', in which corporations were declared to be persons under the law.〕 Given the legal system's affirmation of its position, the SP began to forcibly remove some of the settlers. Their agents would attempt to serve eviction notices, but often would not find anyone at home, as homeowners knew they were coming. In these cases, the agents then tried removing the furniture from the homes, but the Settler's League would just put the furniture back after the agents' departure. Finally, it escalated to the point at which the agents would then disassemble the houses, but again, volunteers would just put them back together.〔Kings County Office of Education, p. 4〕 The settlers were not above their own brand of justice, either. People who had purchased land from those forced to sell would be harassed by locals, and in one case one farmer who had aligned with the SP had his house burned down.〔R. Brown, p. 101〕 Those supporting the railroads tended to be wealthier than the others, deriding the Settler's League as "a set of demagogues" who were "very anxious to get something for nothing."〔R. Brown, pp. 102–04〕 Although the settlers received the benefit of a section of public opinion, politically and legally every decision was going the way of the railroad. In March 1880, Stanford himself attempted a reconciliation by appearing in Hanford and meeting with the Settler's League in an attempt to find some sort of compromise.〔R. Brown, p. 106〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Mussel Slough Tragedy」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|