USA > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco > San Francisco, a history of the Pacific coast metropolis, Volume I > Part 43
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 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64
There had been serious frauds committed at elections. Repeating, ballot-box stuffing and every device known to unscrupulous politicians had been practiced for years. Men who had scarcely received a vote were declared elected to office, and others who had been voted for by a majority of their fellow citizens were counted out, but as soon as the aroused respectability of the City did its duty these troubles promptly ceased and were unheard of until a period of security and decent govern- ment bred fresh neglect. The so-called better elements were able to get good re- sults without resorting to Australian ballots or other devices to preserve the purity of elections. The latter was accomplished by the simple process of carefully watching and preventing manipulation. In other words the unceasing exercise of civic vigilance did the business.
Primary Methods Disregarded
The people's party set the example, which was followed in after years, of dis- pensing with the assistance of the rank and file of the electorate excepting on elec- tion days. Primaries were relegated to the political junk heap of the period, and a group of men originally selected from the executive committee of the Vigilance Committee undertook the important task of choosing candidates for municipal of- fices. In the beginning it was resolved that no one connected with the executive body of the Vigilance Committee should run for or accept an appointment to office, but this was later modified into an agreement that no member should antagonize the nominees of the people's party, which, of course, had the effect of keeping members of the committee from taking office only so long as the policy of disinter- estedness was adhered to by those who had evolved the scheme of control.
Watching at the Polls
That the result for the time being was good there can be little doubt, and it is reasonably certain that the fact that a determined body of men had resolved to secure better municipal government had the desired effect of eliminating corrup- tion, but there is no ground for the assumption that the terror of the Vigilante name deserves the credit of the reforms that were brought about. The platform of the people's party gives the true cause of the improvement. It is found in the demand that good citizens should devote at least a few weeks of their time to public affairs. The aroused sentiment of the community made compliance easy, and when men who were not office seekers, and who had no other object than to secure good gov- ernment busied themselves about the polls the corrupt element found it impossible to carry out schemes which can only be successfully consummated when those whose business it is to prevent them refuse to go to the polls.
A Self Perpetuating Committee
The Vigilance Committee of 1856 had taken possession of the ballot boxes used in the preceding election, and had found that they contained false bottoms and sides, skillfully contrived to enable the manipulators to overwhelm the legitimate vote by mixing spurious with genuine ballots. The crudity of the frauds advertises the
311
SAN FRANCISCO
utter neglect of the better element to take any precautions against their perpetra- tion. As a matter of fact none was taken and the ballot box stuffers did pretty much as they pleased. In the election following the lynching of Cora and Casey all this was changed. Honest ballot boxes were used, and care was taken to see that there should be no repeating, and the people's party ticket was elected to a man. The same result was witnessed in succeeding elections. The people acqui- esced in the practice of what promised to be a self perpetuating committee selecting a ticket for them and then they voted for it by a large majority.
The testimony is unvarying that for six or eight years after 1856 good and capable men were elected to the municipal offices, and they succeeded in effecting a great reduction in expenditures. It may surprise those who elevate the means taken to accomplish an end above the end itself to learn that the theory of secret nomination inaugurated by the Vigilance Committee, and which was adhered to during the nearly eighteen years that the people's party retained power, was ex- tolled by publicists as the best possible method of securing efficient and trustworthy officials. There appeared to be no uneasiness on the score of bossism; nor was there any fear that the republic would be undermined by invading the prerogative of the people of putting forward their own candidates. At the time we are speak- ing of results only counted.
It would be a mistake, however, to attribute all the real or fancied beneficial results which followed the success of the people's party to the selection of good men. The new charter, with which the City was provided through the energy of Horace Hawes, must be credited with a large share of the achievements whichi went by the name of reform. The Consolidation Act of 1856, which for many years remained the organic law of San Francisco, bristled with obstacles to extravagance. Its provisions reflected the temperament of its framer, who had the reputation of being close in all his dealings, and disinclined to enterprise. His cautious disposi- tion was responsible for the reduction of the size of San Francisco by the cutting off of the territory known as San Mateo county, which the City later sought to annex. His theory, which met acceptance, was that rascality could be easier dealt with in a circumscribed than in a large area. In short the underlying principle of the Consolidation Act was the prevention of extravagance and corruption, and the introduction of the strictest economy.
This latter object was attained not so much by the change in the structure of the government as by the introduction of a rigid system of checks, which made ex- penditures for any except the most ordinary purposes practically impossible. The double boards of aldermen and supervisors were superseded by a single body of twelve elected from twelve districts or wards, the theory of the abolitionists of the bi-cameral method, being that the necessity of providing sops for an increased num- ber of municipal legislators offset any advantage which might be derived from their checking propensity. No confidence was reposed in the wisdom or integrity of the elective body which had its powers so carefully defined that they were almost non-existent.
The act also cut salaries to the bone, and contained stringent provisions against the creation of any debt, or liability in any form whatsoever against the City and county, and they proved absolutely invulnerable to assault. The acceptance of an organic act of this character may be fairly attributed to the awakening of civic interest by the Vigilante uprising, but it would be a mistake to assume that it was
Secret Selec- tions Produce Good Results
The Consolidation Act
A Rigid System of Checks
Measures of Economy
312
SAN FRANCISCO
inspired by fear, and it would be a still greater blunder to attribute to that cause the metamorphosis of an extravagant method of administering public affairs into a system which practically banished even the thought of municipal improvement, for that was the outcome of the provisions of the Consolidation Act, which made it impossible to initiate an enterprise, no matter how desirable, without the interven- tion of the legislature.
Desirable Reforms Effected
Nevertheless, binding as were its provisions, the Consolidation Act effected de- sirable reforms, and did much to restore the credit of the City. It paved the way to the funding of its old indebtedness, and in a short time made San Francisco bonds equal to those of the state, whose credit stood high. Extravagance was curbed and taxation reduced, and the citizens were so well satisfied with the result that were quite ready to dispense with the accepted democratic form of select- ing municipal officials, and allow a secret body to name candidates. They would perhaps have been able to justify their acquiescence in the new order of things if the only object of maintaining a municipal government were to secure effective administration, for that is all the reform regime accomplished. There was no con- sideration for the future, and hardly an adequate effort was made to keep in good shape those few improvements which had been acquired, chiefly through individual effort. In short the Consolidation Act inaugurated a policy the inevitable result of which, with the best of intentions on the part of the administrators, had to be dry rot.
National Politics
Side by side with the non-partisan movement for municipal government there was exhibited partisanship in national questions which frequently reached the point of violence. The lines between contending armies were never more clearly drawn than those which divided the advocates of the extension of slavery and the opponents of measures looking to that end. But the division at first only extended to opinion, and did not succeed in obliterating party lines. In the election of 1856 there were three parties, the republican, American and democratic. Although the latter was under the control of the pro-slavery element it triumphed in Cali- fornia. Despite the undoubted popular antagonism to the introduction of servile labor into the state, the same conditions of mind which prompted a large propor- tion of the people of the East to advocate compromise measures exhibited itself in California, and when the parting of the ways came there were many who urged that "the wayward sisters" should be allowed to go in peace. A great majority of the electorate of the state was vehemently opposed to having slavery foisted on California, but many of the majority were quite well satisfied to see it imposed on other sections of the Union. Without taking this attitude into consideration it is impossible to understand the ferment of the years preceding 1861, nor the com- plete about face which occurred when Sumter was fired upon.
The People and the Parties
The revulsion was not as sudden in California as might be inferred from the fact that the democratic party remained in the ascendant almost up to the moment of the beginning of hostilities, for the differences in its ranks were almost as acute as those between democrats and republicans at a later period. The national strug- gle is not a part of the history of San Francisco, but the attitude of San Francis- cans towards the burning questions of the period explain many things which with- out a knowledge of the fluctuations and inconsistencies of the electorate would be obscure and cause misapprehension.
Extreme Partisanism
A careful study of the intimate connection of national politics with the domestic concerns of San Francisco will disclose the probability that most of the erratic
313
SAN FRANCISCO
doings, and much of the crime of the Fifties, was due to the evil influence of the partisanism begotten by the attempt to maintain and extend the institution of slav- ery. Sometimes the connection is difficult to trace, but there is sufficient evidence to support the presumption that if the slavery question had been out of the way the early records of the City would not have been blemished by the Hounds, nor by the uprisings of 1852 and 1856, which were as much directed against the machi- nations of politicians as against criminals. And in taking this ground, it is not necessary to assume that the pro-slavery element monopolized the political wicked- ness of the period, for the testimony points conclusively to a man who has been accounted a martyr to the cause of the Union as being a serious offender, adept in all the arts of the unscrupulous politician, and perhaps more responsible for the wretched condition of affairs which called the Vigilantes into existence than any other San Franciscan.
In making this assertion sight is not lost of the fact that during the Fifties the maxim of the end justifying the means was almost universally accepted in this country. The struggle was fierce and many of those who participated in it were fanatical in their devotion to the side espoused by them, and believed that in the game of politics, as in war, everything was fair; just as in the South to-day, where no compunctions are entertained by those who resort to fraud, and violence when necessary, to prevent the negro gaining power. Hence it is not astonishing to find that David C. Broderick, who undoubtedly indulged in the worst practices of the political boss, became the champion of freedom and finally laid down his life for the cause. It is not necessary to follow the career of Broderick in all its details. Reams have been written about a single episode in his life, and the writers have invariably sought to justify or condemn the actors; few have shown any disposition to recognize that idols often have feet of clay, and that the champions of a great cause may sometimes have the infirmities of very ordinary men. We know from the admissions of those who have extolled Broderick's virtues that during his period of bossism he sold offices to the highest bidder, professedly to raise funds for the party organization, and that he was the beneficiary in numerous unsavory water lot deals. They also tell us that he manipulated so well that he was in absolute control of the legislature, and that at times he was the dispenser of gubernatorial patronage. And after he had succeeded in his ambition and was seated in the United States senate we are informed that his first encounter with the president was over the dispensation of patronage.
But despite his blemished record and the objectionable methods by which he mounted the ladder of his ambition, no one will question the important part Brod- erick performed in keeping alive the sentiment in favor of free labor, which undoubtedly saved California from being carried out of the Union. No ordinary champion of the cause of freedom could have won in the fierce struggle waged in California during the years following the adoption of the constitution at Monterey. The pro-slavery element was unscrupulous and untiring in its efforts to keep Cali- fornia in line, but failed because it had to deal with a man who implicitly believed in fighting the devil with fire. As early as 1850 Broderick opposed a bill introduced in the legislature which was directed against the immigration of free negroes. In 1852 he opposed the Fugitive Slave Law; and in 1854 he fiercely antagonized a resolution which favored the same legislation. There were democrats enough of the uncertain kind in the state at the time to put it through, but Broderick by
Broderick the Champion of Freedom
The Champion of Free Labor
314
SAN FRANCISCO
persistent efforts kept Californians apprised of the fact that the pro-slavery ele- ment was ceaselessly at work and defeated their machinations. When finally elected to the United States senate, although he seems to have made it his first business to dislodge the Southern contingent from the federal offices in San Francisco, and thereby incurred the undying enmity of all the inmates of what was popularly nicknamed "the Virginia Poor House," Broderick was soon found arrayed with the opponents of slavery. His speech on the Kansas troubles, his first discourse in the United States senate, of which he was the youngest member, being only 37 years of age, attracted national attention, and also made a marked man of him.
Broderick Arraigns President Buchanan
This speech was delivered in December, 1857, and was sensational in the ex- treme. In it Broderick expressed wonder at the forbearance of the people of Kansas, and declared that if they had taken the delegates to the Lecompton con- vention, which tried to force slavery on the Kansans, "and had flogged them, or cut their ears off," he would have applauded the act. Two or three months later in a speech he said: "How foolish for the South to hope to contend with success in such an encounter. Slavery is old, and decrepit and consumptive; freedom is young, strong and vigorous. The one is naturally stationary and loves ease; the other is migratory and enterprising." After an apostrophe to labor in which he derided the assumption that cotton was king, and declared that he represented a state in which toil was honorable, he concluded with a direct assault on the presi- dent: "I hope in mercy, sir, to the boasted intelligence of this age," he said, "the historian when writing a history of these times will ascribe this attempt of the executive to force this constitution upon an unwilling people to the fading intellect, the petulant passion and trembling dotage of an old man on the verge of the grave."
Legislative Instructions Disregarded
Although this bold arraignment of Buchanan procured for Broderick the hatred of the pro-slavery element at the East and in California, and was perhaps responsible for the legislative resolution instructing the two California senators, Gwin and Broderick, to vote for the Lecompton constitution, the latter was undoubtedly within the truth when he said, in refusing to abide by the instructions, "I am satisfied that four-fifths of the people of California repudiate the Lecompton fraud," but he might have added that they would have assumed a different attitude had he not, by the vigor of his advocacy of the cause of freedom, made them see a great white light. The legislature condemned Broderick for his position on the Lecompton measure and stigmatized his reflections on the president as a disgrace and humilia- tion to the nation, but in 1861 their successors expunged from the records an arraignment dictated by the federal officeholders, of whom nearly ninety-eight per cent were Southerners.
Republican Overtures to Broderick
Broderick left Washington for California in March, 1859, on the adjournment of congress. While passing through New York he was insulted by two men from New Orleans who sought a quarrel with him, but on this occasion he preferred the rule of the big stick to the uncertainties of the duel and baffled an undoubted effort to put him out of the way. By this time Broderick had almost ceased to be a democrat except in name. He had come to believe that the South was seeking war, but he found it difficult to shake off the party fetich. The democrats were hope- lessly divided over the Lecompton measure and Horace Greeley, who visited Cali- fornia in 1859, sought to bring about a fusion of Broderick's adherents with the republicans, but the time was not ripe for such a movement. The relations of
315
SAN FRANCISCO
Broderick with Baker, the republican candidate for congress, however, became very intimate, and in stumping the state the senator naturally allied himself with the republicans by vigorously denouncing the Federal Brigade and charging that his colleague Gwin was "dripping with corruption."
Broderick's career was ended by a pistol shot he received in a duel with David S. Terry. The meeting took place on the 13th of September, 1859, and the victim died three days later. Volumes have been written about this affair of "honor," and opinions have varied with the bias of the writers. A part of the press vehe- mently expressed the view that Broderick was murdered, and intimated that he was the victim of a conspiracy. The assertion was made that many of his opponents were longing to shoot him, but there are features connected with the encounter which divest it of the appearance of deliberation, and will permit the unbiased to think that it was the outcome of a highly inflamed state of public opinion, and the propensity of the period to settle political quarrels by a resort to the code.
Terry had served through the Mexican war as a mounted ranger and came to California from Texas in 1849. He was a lawyer, and like most Southerners took an active part in politics and early found himself in opposition to Broderick, whom he strongly opposed in the convention of 1854. After that event Terry, who had always theretofore acted with the democrats, left that party and joined the Native Americans and in 1855 was elected by them associate justice of the supreme court. On the death of Chief Justice Murray, Terry was appointed his successor, and three years later he was a candidate before the Lecompton convention to succeed himself, but was unable to secure the nomination. He held Broderick responsible for his defeat, and in his exasperation he made charges that the men who had defeated him while claiming to be Douglas democrats were in fact abolitionists. He concluded his charge with the remark: "Perhaps I am mistaken in denying their rights to claim Douglas as a leader ; but it is the banner of the black Douglass whose name is Frederick and not Stephen they are under."
Broderick was ready to defend the right of the free negro to enter California, and he was consistently opposed to every effort to abridge the rights of those already in the state. He fought against the efforts to exclude negro testimony from the courts, and was ready to shed his blood to prevent the extension of slavery, but he was unable to brook the intimation that he could be led by a "nigger," and resented being called an abolitionist, consequently he became angry when he read the newspaper report of the speech in which the quoted words occurred. He was seated at the breakfast table in the International hotel in San Francisco, when he first saw the account, and remarked that when Terry was incarcerated by the Vigilance Committee he had paid $200 a week to a newspaper to defend him, and added, "I have said that I considered him the only honest man on the supreme bench, but now I take it all back."
There happened to be in the room a man named Perley whom Terry had seconded in a duel some years previously, and he at once demanded of Broderick whether he was referring to Terry. Broderick answered "Yes" and Perley chal- lenged him, but his invitation was declined on the ground that he was not the equal in station of the challenged party. Two months later, September 8, 1859, Terry wrote to Broderick demanding a retraction. The message was carried te the senator by Calhoun Benham, and Broderick replied asking Terry to be specific as the remarks attributed to him might have been misrepresented. Terry wrote
Broderick Killed by Terry
Terry's Early Career
Abolitionist a Term of Reproach
Terry Demands a Retraction
316
SAN FRANCISCO
again repeating the words used and Broderick acknowledged their correctness, and added, "you are the best judge as to whether the language affords good ground for offense." At this distance of time, when the passions of the antebellum period have burnt to ashes, we ought to be able to recognize that Broderick's answer was not one calculated to turn away wrath, and that it constituted a provocation which even in these days might cause a resort to violence, and must have inevitably called for a challenge when the duello was considered the proper tribunal for settling quarrels between gentlemen.
Meeting of Broderick and Terry
The meeting was arranged by Calhoun Benham and J. C. Mckibben who rep- resented Broderick. Broderick had the reputation of being one of the best shots in the state. The duel was fought with a pair of pistols of the most approved type of European weapons used for that purpose, and it was asserted that Terry was familiar with a defect in one of them which caused it to be quick on the trigger. When the combatants met it was disclosed that Broderick's seconds had brought no pistols. A city gunsmith however, had brought a new pair which had never before been fired. Terry won the choice of weapons, and the pistols brought by his seconds were used, but Broderick's second, Mckibben, after snapping a cap on one of them declared himself satisfied and failed to exact a requirement of the code which called for tossing to decide who should have first choice of the pistols. Terry's second took one of the pistols and the one left was that which had the alleged defect to which allusion has been made. On his deathbed Broderick declared that he did not touch the trigger and that the movement of raising his arm caused it to explode and discharge the bullet into the ground. It is also asserted that Terry said to Benham immediately after Broderick fell that the wound was not mortal, "I have hit two inches too far out," he added, and this was reckoned against him as an indication of a deliberate intention to kill, and was taken as a complete refutation of the assumption that Terry did not know how to shoot, and had engaged in the affair under that disadvantage.
Broderick's funeral was attended by a majority of the citizens of San Francisco, and an oration was pronounced over his body by E. D. Baker, afterward United States senator, and a colonel in the Civil war, and one of the first officers to be killed in that conflict. It was an impassioned appeal, and was as much a political deliv- erance as a eulogy of the victim. Baker was a great orator and was as convincing as he was eloquent. His oration made a profound and lasting impression which was not speedily effaced, and it may be truly said of it that it proved as potent to destroy the secession sentiment which later manifested itself, as the eloquent ad- dresses of Rev. Thomas Starr King.
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.