Search All Items

Note: Check the about page for more information on the data sources used in this search

Search Results 171 to 180 of 6559

  • Old Series Trademark No. 2086

    Dragon

    Date: 1892

  • "Policies and Procedures Governing the Administration of Services and Assistance to Enemy Aliens Affected by Governmental Action: A Handbook for State Agencies

    Handbook prepared by the Bureau of Public Assistance

    Date: June 1942

  • McCarthy Album 05, Photograph 020

    Caption: "San Francisco Fire." Photograph of the front page of the Seattle Daily Times, April 20, 1906, in regard to the earthquake and fire that destroyed much of San Francisco on April 18, 1906. The primary headline reads "CITY WIPED OUT! Fire Still Raging!" See also 96-07-08-alb08-186.

    Date: 1906-04-20

  • Old Series Trademark No. 2593

    L. Gandolfi and Co.

    Date: 1895

  • Old Series Trademark No. 0219

    Aunt Carrie's Magic Salve and Pile Ointment

    Date: 1872

  • Old Series Trademark No. 1462a

    Red Dragon

    Date: 1887

  • Old Series Trademark No. 0031

    Empire Soda Works

    Date: 1864

  • eichler_f3274_252

    Plan by Alfred Eichler for first floor of proposed Governor's Mansion. Not built. Project for Office of the Governor.

    Date: 1931

  • Case No. 3091, Ellen R. Van Valkenburg v. Albert Brown, Brief of Respondent

    A Brief of Respondent is filed in the appellate court by the party who won in the previous trial and defends the lower court’s original decision. Ellen Van Valkenburg began an important legal battle for women’s enfranchisement in California on July 21, 1871, when she requested that Santa Cruz County Clerk Albert Brown enter her name in the Great Register of voters. After Brown (a willing accomplice in helping her bring the case to court) refused to register her, Van Valkenburg and her lawyer, Santa Cruz Judge Albert Hagan, began legal proceedings by requesting a writ of mandamus, a judicial remedy used to compel agencies to perform ministerial acts, such as registering voters. Van Valkenburg and Hagan argued her case by citing the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The new amendment, ratified 3 years earlier in 1868, defined all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. as citizens protected by civil rights. Van Valkenburg and Hagan asserted that American women were considered citizens under this amendment, and that citizenship automatically granted absolute rights, including the right to vote. The case first went to California’s Third District Court. Many of America’s most prominent suffragists, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, were with Van Valkenburg in Santa Cruz when the lower court ruled against her on August 16, 1871. Van Valkenburg and Hagan swiftly appealed this decision through the Supreme Court of California. In the end, the Supreme Court of California upheld the lower court’s verdict under the reasoning that as a white American woman, Van Valkenburg already had citizenship and civil rights prior to the passage of the 14th amendment, and that the 14th amendment did not provide her with any additional political rights, such as the right to vote. While Van Valkenburg lost her case, and subsequent lawsuits failed to secure women's suffrage nationwide, the case stands as a critical early example of legal advocacy for women's political rights in California.

    Date: October 2, 1871

  • Old Series Trademark No. 3445

    Jas. Hennessy and Co. Cognac

    Date: 1899