Placerville's County Seat Controversy
May 31, 2017 04:51PM ● By Jerrie Beard
In 1850, two years after the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which made a large portion of the southwest the possession of the U.S., there was a push for California statehood. The soon-to-be state was divided into 27 counties, including El Dorado County. The task of creating boundaries for these counties was complicated by the fact that large portions of the state were still unexplored and much of it scarcely populated. Over time, boundaries have been adjusted, but El Dorado County remains nearly the same as originally designated.
In 1850, Coloma was the center of the Gold Rush with perhaps the largest population in El Dorado County, so it was voted to become the county seat. Over the next couple of years, the Placerville and Weber Creek areas grew in population and importance. In January of 1854, residents of Placerville sent a resolution to the California State Legislature requesting the county seat be moved to Placerville. The legislature passed an act in April 1854 that placed the issue on the general election ballot in September 1854.
This was a contentious issue, and between April and September there was much agitation in the county. Several other towns—Diamond Springs, Mud Springs and Greenwood—also wished to become the county seat. The vote was so divided that Coloma prevailed with 4,601 votes to Placerville’s 3,745; Diamond Springs received 2,073 votes, Mud Springs 685, and Greenwood 441.
The question of moving the county seat resurfaced again in early 1856 when the residents of Cosumnes and White Oak townships, in the southern part of the county, requested the seat be moved to Placerville, which was more centrally located. On May 17, 1856, a special election was held to determine the county seat.
On the day of the election, fearing that proponents of Coloma retaining the county seat might commit fraud, citizens of Placerville sent agents to each polling precinct to verify and certify through a proper officer the number of votes cast for Placerville and Coloma. These returns showed Placerville receiving 5,926 votes to Coloma’s 5,280—a victory for Placerville by 646 votes. Yet, the official voting results reported two weeks later showed 13,308 certified votes reported with Coloma receiving 7,413 and Placerville 5,895.
The citizens of Placerville were outraged and held a meeting in which it was resolved that “fraudulent returns have been made to the county clerk from three precincts, representing a vote of 2,245 votes, thereby changing the result, and overriding the voice of the people…” It was also resolved that the returns from Uniontown, Dry Creek House, and McDowellville were “base forgeries upon the election franchise.”
The county seat issue was finally resolved in 1857 by the California Legislature. A bill to remove the county seat from Coloma to Placerville was presented to the assembly by Mr. G. McDonald and quickly passed the lower house and the senate.
A group of dissenters proposed dividing El Dorado County along the South and Middle Forks of the American River running east to the state line. A bill was introduced to the assembly, but never reached the assembly floor for a vote.
Meanwhile, in the southern part of the county, the area from Dry Creek to the South Fork of the Consumnes River was given over to Amador County with little fanfare.
The question of removing the county seat surfaced one last time in the California Legislature in March 1858. A bill introduced requesting an appropriation of $50,000 to construct the county buildings in Placerville was answered with a substitute bill to remove the county seat back to Coloma. The bill passed the lower house, but not the senate, and the issue was never again considered.