USA > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco > History of the San Francisco Committee of vigilance of 1851 : a study of social control on the California frontier in the days of the gold rush > Part 21
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47
The Committee also took cognizance of charges of murder lodged against George Spires and Richard Hall, who were accused of poisoning Frank Brewer. and who, like Lewis, were awaiting investigation by the grand jury to be impaneled in July. Dr. M. P. Burns, a physician entrusted with the post-mortem analysis, was a member of the Committee, A copy of his report was sub- mitted to that body two days before it was made public in the Alta California of June 18.33 The archives frequently refer to "The Brewer Case," although its conduct was left entirely to the courts. Both men were finally discharged.
The chief of the Vigilante police had a watchful eye for suspicious actions, wherever they might be observed. During the evening of June 15 Mr. Thomas Belcher Kay, late of Sydney and recently warden of the port of San Francisco,34 was seen on Powell Street in conference with a man who seemed to be under the influence of liquor. Kay became so uneasy when aware of surveillance that Van Bokkelen made a special report on the matter.35 His intuitions were fully justified by later revelations, which showed that the ex-warden was one of the most un- serupulous members of the Sydney gang. His successful attempts
32 Papers, 31 note 4.
33 Papers, 33-34.
34 Kay's resignation was noted in the Herald, 1851, May 15 31-
35 Papers, 32, 232 note 26. See also infra, p. 282.
239
The Records for June
to evade arrest by the Committee furnished an interesting episode in the records for July.
It has been said that few attempts were made to express public condemnation of the Committee of Vigilance. It is certain, how- ever, that an element in the city was anxious to find an oppor- tunity to register its disapproval. On June 17 a handbill was distributed which called upon the lovers of law and order to meet on the Plaza on June 22 and take steps to suppress the "secret inquisition " and the "midnight murderers" that were disgracing the city.36 The Committee investigated the origin of this broad- side, found that it had been printed at the office of the Sunday Dispatch, that the original manuscript was signed by William French and George Stephens, and that the mayor in person had prohibited its further distribution.37
The meeting sumoned so passionately was never held. On Sunday, June 22, the citizens of San Francisco were struggling to check the ravages of another disastrous fire. The blaze started in the morning. at the corner of Pacific and Powell streets, and spread fiercely to the east and south, laying waste the whole, or parts, of sixteen blocks of buildings, and destroying property valued at three million dollars.
The Annals called the fire "unquestionably incendiary"38 and it was so regarded at the moment. The crowds that swept through the scorching streets were ready for furious vengeance upon any one even suspected of the erime, and two men were beaten to death by mobs on suspicion of robbery and incendiar- ism.39 A like fate threatened Captain Harris, master of the bark
36 See infra, p. 460.
37 Papers, 37-38, 58. It was intimated in the California Courier, June 19, that Broderick was instrumental in this publication, but the statement was retracted in the next issue.
38 Annals, 345, 611.
39 Herald, 1851, June 24 33. Two men were also shot by the police for looting. Saint-Amant, who arrived shortly after this, found the city greatly in dread of another fire (Voyages, 124-125).
240
Vigilance Committee of 1851
Timandra, from Sydney, who indulged in such a violent dispute over the method that should be adopted to extinguish a blazing tar barrel that he was charged with an attempt to spread the fire, It was in vain that he protested his innocence-his Sydney con- nection was all to his discredit-and an angry mob began to raise cries of "Hang him!" and to look about for a convenient scaffold. Realizing his peril, Harris shouted aloud the names of the agents of his vessel, Messrs. Davidson and Argenti, the latter a member of the Committee of Vigilanee. Other Vigilantes, heeding this eall, rushed to the captain's aid, and claimed the right to remove him under arrest to headquarters. A hand-to- hand tussle ensued ; the prisoner was badly bruised, his clothing was torn and his valuables were lost, but in the end a rescue was effected. Harris was glad enough to spend the night under safe shelter, and grew so friendly with his pseudo jailers that he signed the roll of members as number 468. The irregularity of that proceeding is indicated by the annotations "Discharged" and "Not a member."40
This episode of Captain Harris has scant mention in the papers of the Committee. Theodore Dahlgren, later under arrest, spoke of his efforts to assist at the rescue, and of the subsequent charge that he took advantage of the opportunity to pilfer a watch from the gentleman's pocket ; and on July 14 there was filed a letter in which Harris claimed indemnity for the lost article.41 These allusions, however, are fully explained by reference to the Sydney (N. S. W.) Morning Herald, for the shipmaster returned to his home port seething with indignation at his treatment in San Francisco, and published a long letter on September 1 in which he accused the Committee of inciting the mob and of making the arrest in the hope of effecting a popular execution -- a crime which motives of prudence alone prevented. He branded
40 Papers, 41.
41 Papers, 147, 279, 280.
241
The Records for June
the members of the Committee as "bloodhounds" who "under the spurious name of Liberty and Order, roam continually in the good work of exterminating the Australian"; accused them of the loss of his valuable watch; and warned his countrymen to avoid the dangers of a sojourn on the California Coast. He further protested that the press of the state was so in fear of the influence of the Committee that no paper would publish the facts in his case. He especially blamed the editor of the Alta Cali- fornia for refusing to print a letter on the subject sent to him immediately after the fire.
Many of the papers published in Australia at this time reflected great indignation at the acts of the Vigilance Com- mittee, hurled against them "tirades of abuse and slander,"42 and denounced them as exhibitions of race hatred and jealousy against foreigners. That severe judgment was somewhat softened upon further information and several friendly articles were printed. On November 8 the Sydney Herald gave space to a long communication from Thomas Hinigan, a Sydney resident who had been in San Francisco for some eighteen months, during which time he had acted as marine reporter for one of the daily papers. Hinigan substantiated the main facts of the captain's story, but pointed out that the Committee actually rescued the prisoner from a mob that was on the point of lynching him. He especially refuted the statement that the press feared to offend the Committee of Vigilance, and said that the Alta was so reduced in size after the fire that it had space for only a brief paragraph regretting the unfortunate episode. #3 Hinigan returned to San Francisco not long afterwards and offered his aid to the Committee in a letter that gave interesting comments on the public sentiments current in Sydney.44
42 Papers, 746.
43 This notice appeared in the Alta, 1851, June 26 33 (Steamer Edition).
44 Papers, 746-747. The Alta, 1851, Oct. 5 %, quoted from the People's Advocate, of Sydney, a letter in which W. M. Curtayne strongly commended the work of the Committee.
242
Vigilance Committee of 1851
The Sunday of the fire was a busy day for the Committee, Such squads as the one that rescued Captain Harris patrolled the streets constantly, on the watch for incendiaries and for thieves. While none of the former was detected, at least nine men were brought to headquarters charged with the possession of stolen goods.45 All of these except one Mexican succeeded in establish- ing their innocence and were discharged. The single conviction46 was followed by a public flogging of twenty-five lashes, mentioned with approval in the papers of June 25. The chastisement was not severe, as the knots on the cat had been removed. So far as the official records or the newspapers report, this was the only corporal punishment inflicted by the Committee of Vigilance of San Francisco.47 Emphasis should be laid on the difference between this fact and the popular imagination, which sometimes presents the Vigilantes of San Francisco as the administrators of merciless flagellations. Even Bancroft asserted that "many were publicly whipped,"49 but his statement is not corroborated by the records or by the daily papers.
While some of the Committee guarded the burning city on that Sunday in June, the water police watched the Bay for boats loaded with stolen plunder. One of the patrols tried to over- haul Captain Hammer, of the Medora, who was returning to his vessel after the excitements of the day. He indignantly refused to lie to, and the occupants of the two boats indulged in a struggle which threatened serious consequences before the cooler heads among them could restore peace.4?
Two other incidents of June 22 must be noted. On that night a man named Samuel Gallagher stabbed to death one Lewis Pollock in a quarrel over an inmate of a vicious resort. Gallagher
45 See Papers, 74-83.
46 Papers, 75-76.
47 A report on the case of Antonio Barsallio, arrested at this time, recom- mended a whipping, but it was annotated "Discharged" (Papers, 82).
48 Popular Tribunals, I, 260.
49 Papers, 79-81.
243
The Records for June
was immediately taken to Vigilance headquarters, but the Com- mittee refused to assume jurisdiction over crimes of sudden passion, and the man was transferred to the city police before morning. The only allusion to the incident in the records is in an unimportant letter, but it was reported in the newspapers. It is of interest as an example of the Committee's policy of leaving the punishment of such offenses to the regular authorities.50
So far, the test of an exciting catastrophe had proved the Vigilantes to be men of calm judgment and self-control. They had inflicted no hasty discipline, shot no looters, and lynched no murderer, although the infectious spirit of violence was rife in the city. Yet that night, in an action comparatively trivial, they involved themselves in difficulties which permanently hampered their work and did much towards disrupting the ties that bound them together in a harmonious organization.
In a brief note, dated June 22, Felix Argenti, an Italian banker, complained that a man named Metcalf had purloined and secreted valuables which he had been hired to remove from the house of an unnamed "lady. ''51 The plaintiff, known as Angelina Duclos, was the close friend and the reputed mistress of Argenti, whose name had been so potent to rescue Captain Harris early in the day.52 Argenti's friends rallied with equal staunch- ness to the aid of this second protégé. On the same night a party of ten or twelve accompanied her to the home of Metcalf, forcibly entered his house, threatened violence if resisted, and searched for the missing property even among the personal effects of his wife and daughter. who were roused from sleep to submit to the investigation. Several articles were claimed and appropriated
50 Four Vigilantes served on the jury that later convicted Gallagher of manslaughter. He was quickly pardoned by the governor. See Papers. 219; Alta, 1851, June 23 24; Herald, June 24 21; Aug. 13 3%; 14 21; Nov. 18 %; Dec. 6 24.
51 Papers, 78.
53 The relationship was scored in the arguments in court (R. A. Lock- wood, Vigilance Committee of San Francisco, 1852, p. 20).
244
Vigilance Committee of 1851
by Mme. Duclos. Metealf retaliated by bringing action for $25,000 damages against Argenti and others who participated in the search, and the suit of Metealf vs. Argenti et al. became one of the standing vexations during the entire period covered by the activities of the Committee.53 At the beginning, however. the threat of actions at law in no way daunted the courage of the committeemen. At a general meeting held July 5 they passed a resolution authorizing the publication of a notice in which they elaimed the right to enter any premises where they had good reason to believe that they should find incriminating evidence "-and further, deeming ourselves engaged in a good and just cause-WE INTEND TO MAINTAIN IT. ''54
Statements made at a later time indicated that the resolution did not refleet the sentiments of a majority of the Committee,55 but the course it advocated was a logieal outeome of the whole spirit of the Vigilanee organization. The frankness of the avowal only emphasized anew the conflict between the claims of that self-appointed body and the ideals of American liberty. The announcement did not pass without challenge. Mayor Brenham, in an open letter to the citizens of San Francisco,5" specified among other wrongs laid at the door of the Committee that : "They claim and exercise the right of domiciliary visits, without any accountability, of a character not known under any other than inquisitorial governments." Judge Campbell, on another occasion.57 in a charge to the grand jury spoke of "unreasonable searches, without color of authority." The friends of the Com- mittee, however, seem to have accepted its position without fear of any abuse of the lieense claimed, and their confidence was
53 See Papers, 156 note, and Index under "Metcalf"; also infra, pp. 329, 347.
54 Papers, 178.
55 See infra, p. 330.
56 See infra, p. 271, and Brenham's proclamation, Appendix, p. 463.
57 See infra. p. 272, and Campbell's charge, Appendix, p. 464.
245
The Records for June
clearly expressed in a leading editorial of the San Francisco Herald on July 17.
The Committee continued to exercise the "right of search" as necessity arose, but after the Metcalf incident more prudent methods were employed. Explicit instructions were issued in writing, and the men detailed for such service were required to return the orders with annotations showing the success or failure of each mission. Most of the premises entered were lodg- ing houses, where the legal rights of tenants were of small im- portance to the proprietors. At least one landlord signed a formal permit for the investigation.58 No one except Metcalf sued the Committee for trespass and there is no record to indicate that in other instances threats of violence were employed by the committeemen.
The fire of June 22 reawakened the old fears of deliberate arson. Beginning June 26 and for some time thereafter the Committee advertised a reward of $5000 for the capture and conviction of any one guilty of such a crime.59 A charge for posters and another for bill posting, paid at this date,60 lead to the inference that the reward was conspicuously advertised throughout the city, but it did not result in the apprehension and conviction of any incendiaries.
At one time a strong suspicion of arson rested upon a Negro known as Ben Robinson, who came into the hands of the Com- mittee on June 30. In spite of the anti-slavery clause of the state constitution, Ben lived in abject subjection to a depraved white woman, Margaret Robinson, who was in the habit of beat- ing him if he disregarded her wishes. He was arrested by the city police on suspicion of starting the fire of the twenty-second, and confessed that he did so in obedience to Mrs. Robinson, who
58 Papers, Index under "Search without warrant."
59 See infra, p. 461.
60 Papers, Vouchers nos. 29, 34.
246
Vigilance Committee of 1851
had a grudge against the man in whose house the fire originated. With strange negligence, he was allowed to escape from the officers, but members of the Committee of Vigilance immediately seized him, and took him to headquarters, where he repeated his story. Mr. and Mrs. Robinson were arrested the same night. When brought to the Committee rooms they made vigorous denials of the charge; thereupon Ben withdrew his whole eon- fession and accused one of the police officers of bribing him to tell the story. The Vigilantes resolved to take no action in the case until they had investigated the cause of Ben's arrest and discharge. The subcommittee appointed to this duty reported a fortnight later that they were convinced that the whole thing was a plot to ineite the Committee to take hasty action against Mrs. Robinson, whose evil life made credible any tale that might be told about her. The report was accepted, and the Negro and his mistress were discharged on or before July 12.61
It was during this period of activity that the Committee undertook a work of unquestioned value to the community at large-the completion of the county jail already in course of con- struction on Broadway between Kearny and Dupont streets. The building was under the supervision of the Court of Sessions, which controlled the administration of funds for county improve- ment. Large sums had been expended with small results, and the report of the grand jury for April contained charges of gross mismanagement against the officials responsible for the conduct of the work.62 The accusations in no way implicated the sheriff, Colonel Jack Ilays, who had made vigorous efforts to hasten completion. He had tried without much success to raise a public subscription for that purpose,63 and had finally succeeded, by
61 See Papers, Index under "Ben Robinson." The possibility that Mrs. Robinson might be lynched was noted with horror in the Albany Knicker- bocker (Alta, 1851, Oct. 16 23).
62 Alta, 1851, April 29 %.
63 Alta, 1851, May 20 31.
247
The Records for June
the expenditure of personal funds, in preparing a part of the building for occupation.
Even with this addition the prison facilities of the city were still absolutely inadequate, and prisoners constantly escaped from the insecure buildings in which they were confined. For example, late in April eight men had broken out of the city prison, among them being Windred, of the Jansen affair, and George Adams and William Watkins, two notorious thieves.64 Watkins and Adams were quickly rearrested, and on May 6 Watkins made good a boast that he could escape from any jail65 by cutting a hole in the floor and departing in company with Adams and other friends known as Switzer, Welsh, and Gardner.66 The Alta of May 9 stated that twelve or fourteen more prisoners had broken from the station house, which was a wretched cellar under the city hall where as many as three dozen persons were tumbled together, without sanitary necessities, and fed on a scanty diet of bread and water.67 Adams, Welsh and Switzer were reincarcerated and on June 2 they escaped again with six others, this being the third escape made by Adams during a period of six weeks.68 Watkins was presently recaptured,69 but the others remained at large.
Such events constantly emphasized the need for a well con- structed prison. The Herald of June 16 spoke of the unsatis- factory progress of the work on the county jail, stated that fourteen or fifteen hundred dollars were then owing to the sheriff, and suggested that the Committee of Vigilance should take the matter in hand. Four days later John Caperton, the under sheriff of the county, invited the Committee to send a delegation to examine the new building.7º A tour of inspection followed without delay. The visitors found seven cells occupied; the
64 Alta, 1851, April 24 %. 68 Alta, 1851, June 3 %.
65 Alta, 1851, April 29 2%.
69 Alta, 1851, June 7 %.
66 Alta, 1851, May 7 %.
67 Alta, 1851, May 26 24.
70 Papers, 93.
248
Vigilance Committee of 1851
largest, twelve by fourteen feet, held fourteen prisoners, and the others, six by nine feet, held six each.71 The keeper's room was also finished; another tier of cells needed only doors to be habitable, although a part of the building was without a roof.72 The subcommittee recommended the raising of funds for the com- pletion of the prison and at a General Meeting on July 5 it was resolved that each member should secure ten subscriptions of three dollars each.73
Suitable blanks were distributed within a few days,74 and the work of collection extended over a period of several weeks. In the meantime a further report was made on the condition of the jail.75 This was transmitted to Sheriff Hays, as is evident from the following note, which is missing from the files of the archives. but may be found in Popular Tribunals :76
Executive Chamber of the Committee of Vigilance, San Francisco, August 11, 1851.
To John C. Hays, Esq., High Sheriff for the City and County of San Francisco:
Dear Sir:
Permit me, on behalf of the Committee of Vigilance, to offer you the annexed report, with the action thereon; and in their name I offer, with the concurrence of my colleagues, the thanks of the Committee for your perseverance, skill, and assiduity in bringing the affairs of our county prison to so happy an issue. We regret much that you personally should have suffered any pecuniary inconvenience in the prosecution of its financial affairs, and earnestly hope that the pittance raised by us may
71 Papers, 157-162.
72 The unroofed condition was described in the Herald, 1851, Sept. 11 33 ; 19 %.
73 Papers, 177.
74 Papers, 247 note 3. Thirty-seven sheets, containing over 300 signa- tures, are preserved in the archives, but have not been printed, as the signa- tures are often illegible, and the list is incomplete.
75 Papers, 347-349.
76 Popular Tribunals, I, 401-402. The absence from the archives of several documents which were printed in that volume, and pencilled annota- tions upon others, indicate that Bancroft sent original papers to the printer, and that some were not returned to the files.
249
The Records for June
serve to carry out your sanguine expectations and subserve the public safety. As a public servant we have much in you to commend, and at all times as citizens will lend our aid to assist you in your legitimate course of office.
May you long survive to serve the state of your adoption and receive the good wishes of your fellow-citizens.
Very truly, your obedient servant, STEPHEN PAYRAN, President of the Executive Committee.
The raising of the fund was not completed until September. It finally amounted to about $4700, and was placed at the dis- posal of Sheriff Hays, to be disbursed under his instructions by the treasurer of the society.77 The recorder's office of San Francisco still bears indirect testimony to this act of the Com- mittee in two records showing that on February 6, and on March 30, 1852, B. D. Baxter and Sheriff J. C. Hays respectively acknowledged the satisfaction of liens on the county jail.78 It was proposed in the Committee that after these incumbrances upon the building were released, another lien should be executed in the name of the Vigilantes. In this way it was thought that the Committee might be reimbursed when the jail fund should be replenished from the county taxes. No record of such a lien has been found.79
The example set by the citizens of San Francisco when they banded together for mutual protection received the hearty approval of many of the smaller towns. As soon as the Com- mittee felt assured of the support of its local community, it made a bold appeal for more extended cooperation by publishing the following open letter in the papers of San Francisco :80
77 Papers, 622, 729, and Index under "County Jail of San Francisco." Facsimiles of interesting documents appear in Papers, 729; Popular Trib- unals, I, 307.
78 San Francisco-Recorder, General Index.
79 The lien is mentioned in the Papers, 157, 161, 602, 723, 729, 740.
80 Herald, and Alta, 1851, June 14.
250
Vigilance Committee of 1851
The Committee of Vigilance of San Francisco to the Citizens of Califor- nia:
Should the order-loving portion of the citizens of Sacramento City, Stockton, the Pueblo de San Jose, Monterey, Marysville, and all other towns and cities of the State find it necessary, they are invited to form themselves into Committees of Vigilance, for the purposes set forth in the Constitution of the Committee of Vigilance of San Francisco.
The object of the formation of these committees is moreover for the purpose of corresponding with each other, so as to be able to mark and notice the movements of all disorderly or suspicious characters. By vigilance we may succeed in driving from our midst those who have become so baneful and obnoxious to our communities.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMITTEE.
Friday, June 13, 1851.
The suggestion met with a cordial response. Before the end of June Committees were formed at Marysville, Santa Clara, and Sacramento, and in other neighborhoods as the summer went on. There was a constant interchange of correspondence between these independent associations, and mutual help was given in the detection of criminals. But the history of the out-of-town Com- mittees is not an integral part of the narrative of the parent society, and it is considered by itself in a subsequent chapter.81
In San Francisco a gratifying decrease in erime marked the weeks that immediately succeeded the execution of Jenkins. No doubt this was partially due to the summer movement toward the mining regions. Both the Herald and the Alta credited it, however, to the influenee exerted by the Committee of Vigilance, which by the end of June numbered between five and six hun- dred members.82 This created a large and effective foree of private detectives, and since the uninitiated were ignorant of the extensive ramifications of the society. the rogues could never tell when one of the Committee might be at their elbows.83 With
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.