This page contains information about defunct California counties, as well as a list of counties that have had name changes. Also included here is a list of original materials for defunct Klamath County and information about where to find them.
The coordinator of this page since 01 Jan 2018 is Elizabeth E. Bullard.
Unknown County Message Board (Ancestry.com)
Use this message board if you are unclear about which California county might be holding records that you are seeking. Records may be held by multiple counties due to border changes or abolishment of a county, for example..
If you would like to learn more about becoming a County Coordinator and a part of The CAGenWeb Project, or if you have any other questions relating to this county, please read our Policies & Procedures and then contact our State Coordinator.
Buena Vista County, created by an act of the California State Legislature, passed April 30, 1855, was a failed attempt at a county created from territory of Tulare County. It was the predecessor of Kern County, which was organized successfully in 1866.
In 1864, Coso County was approved by the California State Legislature, which designated territory in Mono and Tulare Counties to be in the new county with the county seat at Bend City. Coso County, however, was never organized. In 1866, essentially the same territory was created as Inyo County.
Klamath County was created in 1851 from the northern half of Trinity County. In 1857 Klamath County lost significant territory to the newly formed Del Norte County. In 1875 Klamath County was abolished and its territory was divided between Humboldt and Siskiyou Counties.
Territory which at one time was in Klamath County is now in Del Norte, Humboldt, Siskiyou, and Trinity Counties.
Humboldt County maintains several original materials that belonged to Klamath County.
Pautah County was created in 1852 out of territory which, the state of California assumed, was to be ceded to it by the United States Congress from territory in what is now the state of Nevada. When the cession never occurred, the California State Legislature officially abolished the never-organized county in 1859.
Fearing that the state would lose out on valuable ore, Californians wanted to be certain that they got all of the territory on both sides of the Sierra Nevada mountain range. California Legislature believed that U.S. Congress would be willing to cede to California the part of the Sierra Nevada mountains not included in California's borders, so it simply moved forward and created a county from the land that it wanted. The county covered a roughly diamond-shaped area that included the modern locations of Reno, Virginia City, and Carson City, plus the entire eastern shore of Lake Tahoe. The county seat was Carsonville.
California's demand to have the land ceded to it went nowhere in Congress. The Civil War was looming and the southern representatives felt that Utah Territory (modern Utah and Nevada) should become a slave state, so they blocked any proposals to expand California's borders. Eventually, in 1859, the California Legislature repealed the act creating Pautah. Ironically, this area was the source of an enormous discovery of silver just around the time that California finally relinquished its claim.
This site was updated last on 27-Jan-2019 0:36
Branciforte County was one of the original 27 counties adopted by statutes of 1850, but soon after that the legislature changed the name to Santa Cruz County.
Coloma County was a county proposed by a committee of the California Constitutional Convention. Before the statute was adopted, the legislature changed the name to El Dorado County.
Fremont County was a county proposed by a committee of the California Constitutional Convention. Before the statute was adopted, the legislature changed the name to Yola County and later changed the name to Yolo County.
Mount Diablo County was a county proposed by a committee of the California Constitutional Convention. Before the statute was adopted, the legislature changed the name to Contra Costa County.
Oro County was a county proposed by a committee of the California Constitutional Convention. Before the statute was adopted, the legislature changed the name to Tuolumne County.
Redding County was a county proposed by a committee of the California Constitutional Convention. Before the statute was adopted, the legislature changed the name to Shasta County.
At the Humboldt County Library, Humboldt Room, Eureka, California, is the following book:
Susie Baker Fountain Papers
HR 979.412 v.114
Klamath Township p 36-75
Minutes of Probate Court, 1851-1874 pg 76-158
Board of Supervisors Minutes, 1861-1874 p 241-310
Klamath County Poll List, 1854 p. 393-466
Klamath County Poll List, 1861, p. 311-392
At the Humboldt County Recorder's Office, Humboldt County Courthouse, 5th Floor, Eureka, California, are the following Klamath County ledgers, books, and other records:
Grantee Index, 1850-1874
Grantor Index, 1850-1874 (typed index cards that SEEM to be an index to all of the Klamath County ledgers)
Index to Deeds, B & C, 1866-1874
Index to Mortgages, B & C, 1866-1874 (actually, it is for books A & B, not B & C)
Mortgages "E" (says E, but actually is "A")
BOOK B of HOMESTEADS, Klamath County
Elizabeth A. Aber
Jas B. Tonkin
PROBATE, Klamath County
Record of Order of Sale & Confirmation of Real & Personal Estate in Probate Court
Wm. M. Baell/Buell
C. C. artin (Artin? Martin?)
Lorenzo Saddler (Administrator: Edwin Saddler)
RECORD OF TRINIDAD, BOOK "A", DEEDS
CERTIFICATES OF SALE, 1867
PREEMPTION INDEX & CONTENTS "A"
DEED BOOK "B" Index
DEED BOOK "C" Index (this one and the one just above seem to be originals to the above index B & C combined - seems older)
BOOK A - MINING CLAIMS & MISC Agreements, Leases, Miners Claims
REGISTER OF CLAIMANTS, Probate Court, Klamath County
MECHANICS LIENS, Klamath County
REGISTER PROBATE PROCEEDINGS, Klamath County, 1864
LIS PENDENS, Klamath County, 1872
RELEASES OF MORTGAGES, BOOK A
RECORD OF MARRIAGES, Klamath County
Dates & Places of Marriage, Names:
15 Apr 1852, Trinidad, John Campbell & Mary Ann Clemons
15 Jun 1853, Crescent City, Stephen G. Pitts & Julia Ann Bradford
08 Sep 1853, Trinidad, Horace Cushing & Mrs. Caroline R. Clemons
07 Jun 1854, Crescent City, Pierre Lequeville & Anita Gonzales
01 Nov 1854, Crescent City, John P. Haynes & Martha B. Upham
01 Dec 1854, Crescent City, John W. Baker & Emeline Philips
Jan 1855, Crescent City, Mathew Nolan & Mrs. E. A. Mitchell
Jan 1855, Crescent City, Nelson Broban & Miss Melvina D. Hall
02 Mar 1855, Trinidad, John McConnighy & Miss Mary Jane Beard
26 Mar 1855, Crescent City, Wm. Shangler & Mary A. Hardin
30 Mar 1855, Crescent City, Joseph C. Carmon & Mrs. Mary French
For further reference: While Klamath County existed, the court was the 8th District Court -- for Humboldt, Klamath, and Del Norte Counties. This court became a Superior Court in about 1880. The original files for the 8th District Court cases are located at the California State Archives in Sacramento. Original files. No index in Sacramento. However, an index exists at the Humboldt County Historical Society -- upstairs where the old record books are stored. There are separate indices for defendant and plaintiff.
The Legal Stuff:
Website Design © 2018 The CAGenWeb Project. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Notice: The content of this website is a collective work that may contain some private contributions. Said private contributions are so-noted and copyright of those private contributions belongs to the original author. Under no circumstances is any data from this site to be re-published in any fashion without the express written consent of its owner.
This site is not in any way affiliated with any governmental body or agency.
Links to some external websites have been provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only. The act of pointing, via hyperlink, to any website by this website does not in any way whatsoever constitute an endorsement or an approval by The CAGenWeb Project or The USGenWeb Project or any of their affiliates or any of their administrators of any product, service, or opinion that may be appear on that website.
The CAGenWeb Project and The USGenWeb Project and their affiliates and their administrators make no guarantee whatsoever about the content and/or quality of any research material that may be provided by any genealogical or historical researcher that may be listed on this website. The CAGenWeb Project and The USGenWeb Project and their affiliates and their administrators make no guarantee whatsoever about the expertise of any genealogical or historical researcher that may be listed on this website. The listing on this website of any genealogical or historical researcher does not in any way whatsoever constitute endorsement of that genealogical or historical researcher by The CAGenWeb Project or The USGenWeb Project or any of their affiliates or any of their administrators.