At twenty-two I found myself Register
of the Humboldt Land Office, with offices on the first
floor of a building at Eureka, the second story of
which was occupied by a school. An open veranda
extended across the front. When I first let myself
into the office, I carelessly left the key in the
lock. A mischievous girl simply gave it a turn
and I was a prisoner, with a plain but painful way
of escape not physically painful, but humiliating
to my official pride. There was nothing for it
but ignominiously to crawl out of the window onto the
veranda and recover the key and that I
forthwith did.
The archives of the office proved
interesting. The original Register was a Missouri
Congressman, who had been instructed to proceed to
Humboldt City and open the office. Humboldt City
was on the map and seemed the logical location.
But it had “died aborning” and as a city
did not exist. So the Register took the responsibility
of locating the office at Eureka, and in explanation
addressed to the President, whom he denominated “Buckhannan,”
a letter in which he went at length into the “hole”
subject. The original draft was on file.
I was authorized to receive homestead
applications, to locate land warrants, to hear contests,
and to sell “offered land.” The latter
was government land that had been offered for sale
at $1.25 an acre and had not been taken. Strangely
enough, it embraced a portion of the redwood belt
along Mad River, near Arcata.
But one man seemed aware of the opportunity.
John Preston, a tanner of Arcata, would accumulate
thirty dollars in gold and with it buy fifty dollars
in legal-tender notes. Then he would call and
ask for the plat, and, after considerable pawing,
he would say, “Well, Charlie, I guess I’ll
take that forty.” Whereupon the transaction
would be completed by my taking his greenbacks and
giving him a certificate of purchase for the forty
acres of timber-land that had cost him seventy-five
cents an acre, and later probably netted him not less
than three hundred dollars an acre for stumpage alone.
Today it would be worth twice that. The opportunity
was open to all who had a few cents and a little sense.
Sales of land were few and locations
infrequent, consequently commissions were inconsiderable.
Now and then I would hold a trial between conflicting
claimants, some of them quite important. It was
natural that the respective attorneys should take advantage
of my youth and inexperience, for they had known me
in my verdant boyhood and seemed to rejoice in my
discomfiture. I had hard work to keep them in
order. They threatened one another with ink-bottles
and treated me with contempt. They would lure
me on when I rejected evidence as inadmissible, offering
slightly changed forms, until I was forced to reverse
myself. When I was uncertain I would adjourn court
and think it over. These were trying experiences,
but I felt sure that the claimants’ rights would
be protected on appeal to the Commissioner of the General
Land Office and finally to the Secretary of the Interior.
I was glad that in the biggest case I guessed right.
One occurrence made a strong impression
on me. It was war-time, and loyalty was an issue.
A rancher from Mendocino County came to Eureka to
prove up on his land and get a patent. He seemed
to me a fine man, but when he was asked to take the
oath of allegiance he balked. I tried my best
to persuade him that it was harmless and reasonable,
but he simply wouldn’t take it, and went back
home without his patent.
My experiences while chief clerk in
the office of the Superintendent of Indian Affairs
are too valuable to be overlooked. I traveled
quite freely and saw unfamiliar life. I had a
very interesting trip in 1865, to inspect the Round
Valley Indian Reservation and to distribute clothing
to the Indians. It was before the days of railroads
in that part of California. Two of us drove a
light wagon from Petaluma to Ukiah, and then put saddles
on our horses and started over the mountains to the
valley. We took a cold lunch, planning to stay
overnight at a stockman’s ranch. When we
reached the place we found a notice that he had gone
to a rodeo. We broke into his barn to feed our
horses, but we spared his house. Failing to catch
fish in the stream near by, we made our dinner of
its good water, and after a troubled night had the
same fare for breakfast. For once in my life
I knew hunger. To the nearest ranch was half
a day’s journey, and we lost no time in heading
for it. On the way I had an encounter with a
vicious rattlesnake. The outcome was more satisfactory
than it might have been. At noon, when we found
a cattleman whose Indian mate served venison and hot
bread of good quality and abundant quantity, we were
appreciative and happy. The remainder of the
trip was uneventful.
The equal division of clothing or
supplies among a lot of Indians throws helpful light
on the causes of inequality. A very few days suffice
to upset all efforts at impartiality. A few,
the best gamblers, soon have more than they need,
while the many have little or nothing.
The valleys of Mendocino County are
fascinatingly beautiful, and a trip direct to the
coast, with a spin along ten miles of perfect beach
as we returned, was a fine contrast to hungry climbing
over rugged heights.
Another memorable trip was with two
Indians from the mouth of the Klamath River to its
junction with the Trinity at Weitchpec. The whole
course of the stream is between lofty peaks and is
a continuous series of sharp turns. After threading
its winding way, it is easy to understand what an
almost solid resistance would be presented to a rapidly
rising river. With such a watershed as is drained
by the two rivers, the run-off in a storm would be
so impeded as to be very slow. The actual result
was demonstrated in 1861. In August of that year,
A.S. Hallidie built a wire bridge at Weitchpec.
He made the closest possible examination as to the
highest point the river had reached. In an Indian
rancheria he found a stone door-sill that had been
hollowed by constant use for ages. This was then
ninety-eight feet above the level of the flowing river.
He accepted it as absolutely safe. In December,
1861, the river rose thirty feet above the bridge
and carried away the structure.
The Indians living on lower Mad River
had been removed for safety to the Smith River Indian
Reservation. They were not happy and felt they
might safely return, now that the Indian war was over.
The white men who were friendly believed that if one
of the trusted Indians could be brought down to talk
with his friends he could satisfy the others that it
would be better to remain on the reservation.
It was my job to go up and bring him down. We
came down the beach past the mouth of the Klamath,
Gold Bluff, and Trinidad, to Fort Humboldt, and interviewed
many white settlers friendly to the Indians until
the representative was satisfied as to the proper
course to follow.
In 1851 “Gold Bluff” was
the first great mining excitement. The Klamath
River enters the ocean just above the bluff that had
been made by the deposit of sand, gravel, and boulders
to the height of a hundred feet or more. The
waves, beating against the bluff for ages, have doubtless
washed gold into the ocean’s bed. In 1851
it was discovered that at certain tides or seasons
there were deposited on the beach quantities of black
sand, mingled with which were particles of gold.
Nineteen men formed a company to take up a claim and
work the supposedly exhaustless deposit. An expert
report declared that the sand measured would yield
each of the men the modest sum of $43,000,000.
Great excitement stirred San Francisco and eight vessels
left with adventurers. But it soon was found
that black sand was scarce and gold much more so.
For some time it paid something, but as a lure it
soon failed.
When I was first there I was tremendously
impressed when shown at the level of the beach, beneath
the bluff and its growing trees, an embedded redwood
log. It started the imagination on conjectures
of when and where it had been clad in beauty as part
of a living landscape.
An interesting conclusion to this
experience was traveling over the state with Charles
Maltby, appointed to succeed my friend, to turn over
the property of the department. He was a personal
friend of President Lincoln, and he bore a striking
resemblance to him and seemed like him in character.
In 1883 a nominee for the Assembly
from San Francisco declined the honor, and it devolved
on a group of delegates to select a candidate in his
place. They asked me to run, and on the condition
that I should solicit no votes and spend no money
I consented. I was one of four Republicans elected
from San Francisco. In the entire state we were
outnumbered about four to one. But politics ordinarily
cuts little figure. The only measure I introduced
provided for the probationary treatment of juvenile
delinquents through commitment to an unsectarian organization
that would seek to provide homes. I found no opposition
in committee or on the floor. When it was reached
I would not endanger its passage by saying anything
for it. It passed unanimously and was concurred
in by the Senate. My general conclusion is that
the average legislator is ready to support a measure
that he feels is meritorious and has no other motive
than the general good.
We were summoned in extra session
to act on matters affecting the railroads. It
was at a time when they were decidedly in politics.
The Central Pacific was generally credited with controlling
the legislative body of the state. A powerful
lobby was maintained, and the company was usually
able to thwart the passage of any legislation the political
manager considered detrimental to its interests.
The farmers and country representatives did all in
their power to correct abuses and protect the interests
of the people of the state, but the city representatives,
in many instances not men of character, were usually
controlled by some boss ready to do the bidding of
the railroad’s chief lobbyist. The hope
for decency is always in free men, and they generally
are from the country.
It was pathetic at times to watch
proceedings. I recall one instance, where a young
associate from San Francisco had cast a vote that was
discreditable and pretty plainly indicated corrupt
influence. The measure he supported won a passage,
but a motion for reconsideration carried, and when
it came up the following day the father of the young
man was seated by his side as the vote was taken.
He was a much-respected plasterer, and he came from
his home on a hurried call to save his son from disgrace.
It was a great relief when on recall the son reversed
his vote and the measure was lost.
Of course, there were punitive measures,
unreasonable and unjust, and some men were afraid
to be just if the railroad would in any way be benefited.
I tried to be discriminating and impartial, judging
each measure on its merits. I found it was a
thankless task and bred suspicion. An independent
man is usually distrusted. At the end of the
session a fine old farmer, consistently against the
railroad, said to me: “I couldn’t
make you out for a long time. Some days I gave
you a white mark, and some days a black one.
I finally give you a white mark but it
was a close shave.”
I was impressed with the power of
the Speaker to favor or thwart legislation. At
the regular session some Senator had introduced a bill
favoring the needs of the University of California.
He wanted it concurred in by the Assembly, and as
the leading Democrats were pretty busy with their
own affairs he entrusted it to me. The Speaker
favored it, and he did not favor a bill in the hands
of a leader of the house involving an appropriation.
He called me to his seat and suggested that at the
reassembling of the Assembly after luncheon I should
take the floor to move that the bill be placed on
the first-reading file. He knew that the leader
would be ready with his pet bill, but he would recognize
me. When the gavel fell after luncheon three men
leaped for the floor. I arose well at the side
of the chamber, while the leader stood directly in
front, but the Speaker happened (?) to see me first,
and the entrusted bill started for speedy success.
It is always pleasant to discover
unsuspected humor. There was a very serious-appearing
country member who, with the others of a committee,
visited the State Prison at San Quentin. We were
there at the midday meal and saw the prisoners file
in to a substantially laden table. He watched
them enjoy the spread, and quietly remarked, “A
man who wouldn’t be satisfied with such food
as that deserves to be turned out of the State Prison.”
Some reformer had introduced a bill
providing for a complete new code of criminal procedure.
It had been referred to the appropriate committee
and in due time it made its report. I still can
see the committee chairman, a country doctor, as he
stood and shook a long finger at the members before
him, saying: “Mr. Speaker, we ask that this
measure be read in full to the Assembly. I want
you to know that I have been obliged to hear it, and
I am bound that every member of the house shall hear
it.”
My conclusion at the end of the session
was that the people of the state were fortunate in
faring no worse. The many had little fitness;
a few had large responsibility. Doubtful and
useless measures predominate, but they are mostly
quietly smothered. The country members are watchful
and discriminating and a few leaders exercise great
power. To me it was a fine experience, and I
made good friends. I was interested in proposed
measures, and would have willingly gone back the next
term. Some of my friends sounded the political
boss of the period and asked if I could be given a
place on the ticket. He smiled and said, “We
have no use for him.” When the nominating
convention was held he sent in by a messenger a folded
piece of paper upon which was inscribed the name of
the man for whom they had use and my legislative
career was at an end.
I went back to my printing business,
which never should have been neglected, and stayed
mildly by it for eleven years. Then, there being
a vacancy on the Board of Education, I responded to
the wish of friends and accepted the appointment to
help them in their endeavor to better our schools.
John Swett, an experienced educator,
was superintendent. The majority of the board
was composed of high-minded and able men. They
had turned over the selection of teachers to the best-fitted
professors of the university and were giving an economical
and creditable administration. If a principalship
was vacant, applications were apt to be disregarded,
and the person in the department considered most capable
and deserving was notified of election. There
were, however, some loose methods. All graduates
of the high schools were privileged to attend a normal
class for a year and then were eligible without any
examination to be appointed teachers. The board
was not popular with the teachers, many of whom seemed
to consider that the department was mainly for their
benefit. At the end of the unexpired term I was
elected a member of the succeeding board, and this
was continued for five years.
When the first elected board held
a preliminary canvass I naturally felt much interest
as to my associates, some of whom were entire strangers.
Among them was Henry T. Scott, of the firm of shipbuilders
who had built the “Oregon.” Some
one remarked that a prominent politician (naming him)
would like to know what patronage would be accorded
him. Mr. Scott very forcibly and promptly replied:
“So far as I am concerned, not a damned bit.
I want none for myself, and I will oppose giving any
to him or anyone else.” I learned later
that he had been elected without being consulted,
while absent in the East. Upon his return a somewhat
notorious woman principal called on him and informed
him that she was responsible for his election at
least, his name had been submitted to her and received
her approval. He replied that he felt she deserved
no thanks for that, as he had no desire to serve.
She said she had but one request to make; her janitress
must not be removed. He gave her no assurances.
Soon afterward the matter of appointments came up.
Mr. Scott was asked what he wanted, and he replied:
“I want but one thing. It involves the
janitress of Mrs. ’s school.
I want her to be removed immediately.”
“All right,” replied the
questioner. “Whom shall we name?”
“Whomever you please,”
rejoined Scott. “I have no candidate; but
no one can tell me what I must or must not do.”
Substitution followed at once.
Later Mr. Scott played the star part
in the most interesting political struggle I ever
knew. A Democratic victory placed in the superintendent’s
office a man whose Christian name was appropriately
Andrew Jackson. He had the naming of his secretary,
who was ex-officio clerk of the board, which confirmed
the appointment. One George Beanston had grown
to manhood in the office and filled it most satisfactorily.
The superintendent nominated a man with no experience,
whom I shall call Wells, for the reason that it was
not his name. Mr. Scott, a Democratic member,
and I were asked to report on the nomination.
The superintendent and the committee discussed the
matter at a pleasant dinner at the Pacific-Union Club,
given by Chairman Scott. At its conclusion the
majority conceded that usage and courtesy entitled
the superintendent to the appointment. Feeling
that civil service and the interest of the school
department were opposed to removal from position for
mere political differences, I demurred and brought
in a minority report. There were twelve members,
and when the vote to concur in the appointment came
up there was a tie, and the matter went over for a
week. During the week one of the Beanston supporters
was given the privilege of naming a janitor, and the
suspicion that a trade had been made was justified
when on roll-call he hung his head and murmured “Wells.”
The cause seemed lost; but when later in the alphabetical
roll Scott’s name was reached, he threw up his
head and almost shouted “Beanston,” offsetting
the loss of the turncoat and leaving the vote still
a tie. It was never called up again, and Beanston
retained the place for another two years.
Early in 1901 I was called up on the
telephone and asked to come to Mayor Phelan’s
office at once. I found there some of the most
ardent civil service supporters in the city.
Richard J. Freud, a member of the Civil Service Commission,
had suddenly died the night before. The vacancy
was filled by the mayor’s appointment. Eugene
Schmitz had been elected mayor and would take his
seat the following day, and the friends of civil service
distrusted his integrity. They did not dare to
allow him to act. Haste seemed discourteous to
the memory of Freud, but he would want the best for
the service. Persuaded of the gravity of the
matter, I accepted the appointment for a year and filed
my commission before returning to my place of business.
I enjoyed the work and its obvious advantage to the
departments under its operation. The Police Department
especially was given an intelligent and well-equipped
force. An amusing incident of an examination
for promotion to the position of corporal concerned
the hopes we entertained for the success of a popular
patrolman. But he did not apply. One day
one of the board met him and asked him if he was not
to try for it. “I think not,” he replied.
“My early education was very unlimited.
What I know, I know; but I’ll be damned if I’m
going to give you fellows a chance to find out what
I don’t know!”
I chanced to visit Washington during
my term as commissioner, and through the courtesy
of Senator Perkins had a pleasant call on President
Roosevelt. A Senator seems to have ready access
to the ordinary President, and almost before I realized
it we were in the strenuous presence. A cordial
hand-clasp and a genial smile followed my introduction,
and as the Senator remarked that I was a Civil Service
Commissioner, the President called: “Shake
again. I used to be one of those fellows myself.”
Senator Perkins went on: “Mr.
Murdock and I have served for many years as fellow
trustees of the Boys and Girls Aid Society.”
“Ah,” said the President,
“modeled, I presume, on Brace’s society,
in which my father was greatly interested. Do
you know I believe work with boys is about the only
hope? It’s pretty hard to change a man,
but when you can start a boy in the right way he has
a chance.” Turning to me he remarked, “Did
you know that Governor Brady of Alaska was one of
Brace’s placed-out boys!” Then of Perkins
he asked, “By the way, Senator, how is Brady
doing?”
“Very well, I understand,”
replied the Senator. “I believe he is a
thoroughly honest man.”
“Yes; but is he also able?
It is as necessary for a man in public life to be
able as to be honest.”
He bade us a hearty good-by as we
left him. He impressed me as untroubled and courageous,
ready every day for what came, and meeting life with
cheer.
The story of the moral and political
revolution of 1907 has never been adequately told,
nor have the significance and importance of the event
been fully recognized. The facts are of greater
import than the record; but an eyewitness has responsibility,
and I feel moved to give my testimony.
Perhaps so complete a reversal of
spirit and administration was never before reached
without an election by the people. The faithfulness
and nerve of one official backed by the ability of
a detective employed by a public-spirited citizen
rescued the city government from the control of corrupt
and irresponsible men and substituted a mayor and board
of supervisors of high character and unselfish purpose.
This was accomplished speedily and quietly.
With positive proof of bribery that
left conviction and a term in prison as the alternative
to resignation, District Attorney William H. Langdon
had complete control of the situation. In consultation
with those who had proved their interest in the welfare
of the city, he asked Edward Robeson Taylor to serve
as mayor, privileged to select sixteen citizens to
act as supervisors in place of the implicated incumbents,
who would be induced to resign. Dr. Taylor was
an attorney of the highest standing, an idealist of
fearless and determined character. No pledges
hampered him. He was free to act in redeeming
the city. In turn, he asked no pledge or promise
of those whom he selected to serve as supervisors.
He named men whom he felt he could trust, and he subsequently
left them alone, asking nothing of them and giving
them no advice.
It was the year after the fire.
I was conducting a substitute printing-office in the
old car-barn at Geary and Buchanan streets. One
morning Dr. Taylor came in and asked if he might speak
to me in private. I was not supplied with facilities
for much privacy, but I asked him in and we found
seats in the corner of the office farthest from the
bookkeeper. Without preliminary, he said, “I
want you to act as one of the supervisors.”
Wholly surprised, I hesitated a moment and then assured
him that my respect for him and what he had undertaken
was so great that if he was sure he wanted me I would
serve. He went out with no further comment, and
I heard nothing more of it until I received a notice
to meet at his office in the temporary City Hall on
July 16th.
In response to the call I found fifteen
other men, most of whom I knew slightly. We seemed
to be waiting for something. Mr. Langdon was there
and Mr. Burns, the detective, was in and out.
Mr. Gallagher, late acting mayor and an old-time friend
of the District Attorney, was helping in the transfer,
in which he was included. Langdon would suggest
some procedure: “How will this do, Jim?”
“It seems to me, Billy, that this will be better,”
Gallagher would reply. Burns finally reported
that the last of the “bunch” had signed
his resignation and that we could go ahead. We
filed into the boardroom. Mayor Taylor occupied
the chair, to which the week before he had been obediently
but not enthusiastically elected by “those about
to die.” The supervisor alphabetically ranking
offered his written resignation, which the mayor promptly
accepted. He then appointed as successor the
first, alphabetically, on his list. The deputy
county clerk was conveniently near and promptly administered
the oath and certified the commission. The old
member slunk or swaggered out and the new member took
his place. So the dramatic scene continued until
the transformation was accomplished and a new era dawned.
The atmosphere was changed, but was very serious and
determined. Everyone felt the gravity of the
situation and that we had no easy task ahead.
Solemnity marked the undertaking and full realization
that hard work alone could overcome obstacles and
restore endurable conditions.
Many of the men selected by Dr. Taylor
had enjoyed experience and all were anxious to do
their best. With firm grasp and resolute procedure,
quick results followed. There was to be an election
in November. Some of the strongest members had
accepted service as an emergency call and could not
serve longer; but an incredible amount of planning
was accomplished and a great deal disposed of, so
that though ten of the appointed board served but
six months they had rendered a great service and fortunately
were succeeded by other men of character, and the good
work went steadily on. In looking back to the
problems that confronted the appointed board and the
first elected board, also headed by Dr. Taylor, they
seem insurmountable.
It is hard now to appreciate the physical
conditions of the city. It was estimated that
not less than five million dollars would be required
to put the streets into any decent condition.
It was at first proposed to include this, sum in the
bond issue that could not be escaped, but reflection
assured us that so temporary a purpose was not a proper
use of bond money, and we met the expenditure from
the annual tax levy. We found the smallest amount
required for urgent expenditure in excess of the tax
levy was $18,200,000, and at a special election held
early in 1908 the voters endorsed the proposed issue
by a vote of over 21,000 to 1800. The three largest
expenditures were for an auxiliary water system for
fire protection ($5,200,000), for school buildings
($5,000,000), and for sewers ($4,000,000).
I cannot follow the various steps
by which order was brought out of chaos, nor can I
give special acknowledgment where it is manifestly
due; but I can bear testimony to the unselfishness
and faithfulness of a remarkable body of public officials
and to a few of the things accomplished. To correct
gross evils and restore good conditions is no slight
task; but to substitute the best for the worst is a
great achievement. This San Francisco has done
in several marked instances.
There was a time when about the only
thing we could boast was that we spent a less
sum per capita than any city in the Union for the care
of hospital patients. I remember hearing that
fine citizen, Frederick Dohrmann, once say, “Every
supervisor who has gone out of public service leaving
our old County Hospital standing is guilty of a municipal
crime.” It was a disgrace of which we were
ashamed. The fire had spared the building, but
the new supervisors did not. We now have one of
the best hospitals in the country, admirably conducted.
Our City Prison is equally reversed.
It was our shame; it is our pride. The old Almshouse
was a discreditable asylum for the politician who
chanced to superintend it. Today our “Relief
Home” is a model for the country. In 1906
the city was destroyed because unprotected against
fire. Today we are as safe as a city can be.
In the meantime the reduced cost of insurance pays
insured citizens a high rate of interest on the cost
of our high-pressure auxiliary fire system. Our
streets were once noted for their poor construction
and their filthy condition. Recently an informed
visitor has pronounced them the best to be found.
We had no creditable boulevards or drives. Quietly
and without bond expenditure we have constructed magnificent
examples. Our school buildings were shabby and
poor. Many now are imposing and beautiful.
This list could be extended; but turn
for a moment to matters of manners. Where are
the awful corner-groceries that helped the saloons
to ruin men and boys, and where are the busy nickel-in-the-slot
machines and shameless smokers in the street-cars?
Where are the sellers of lottery tickets, where the
horse-races and the open gambling?
It was my fortune to be re-elected
for eight years. Sometimes I am impressed by
how little I seem to have individually accomplished
in this long period of time. One effect of experience
is to modify one’s expectations. It is
not nearly so easy to accomplish things as one who
has not tried is apt to imagine. Reforming is
not an easy process. Inertia is something really
to be overcome, and one is often surprised to find
how obstinate majorities can be. Initiative is
a rare faculty and an average legislator must be content
to follow. One can render good service sometimes
by what he prevents. Again, he may finally fail
in some good purpose through no fault of his own,
and yet win something even in losing. Early in
my term I was convinced that one thing that ought
to be changed was our absurd liquor license. We
had by far the lowest tax of any city in the Union,
and naturally had the largest number of saloons.
I tried to have the license raised from eighty-four
dollars to one thousand dollars, hoping to reduce our
twenty-four hundred saloons. I almost succeeded.
When I failed the liquor interest was so frightened
at its narrow escape that it led the people to adopt
a five-hundred-dollar substitute.
I was led to undertake the correction
of grave abuses and confusion in the naming of the
city streets. The post-office authorities were
greatly hampered in the mail delivery by the duplicate
use of names. The dignified word “avenue”
had been conferred on many alleys. A commission
worked diligently and efficiently. One set of
numbered streets was eliminated. The names of
men who had figured in the history of the city were
given to streets bearing their initials. Anza,
Balboa, and Cabrillo gave meaning to A, B, and C.
We gave Columbus an avenue, Lincoln a “way,”
and substituted for East Street the original name of
the waterfront, “The Embarcadero.”
In all we made more than four hundred changes and
corrections.
There were occasional humorous incidents
connected with this task. There were opposition
and prejudice against names offered. Some one
proposed a “St. Francis Boulevard.”
An apparently intelligent man asked why we wanted
to perpetuate the name of “that old pirate.”
I asked, “Who do you think we have in mind?”
He replied, “I suppose you would honor Sir Francis
Drake.” He seemed never to have heard of
Saint Francis of Assisi.
It was predicted that the Taylor administration
with its excellent record would be continued, but
at the end of two years it went down to defeat and
the Workingmen’s party, with P.H. McCarthy
as mayor, gained strong control. For two years,
as a minority member, I enjoyed a different but interesting
experience. It involved some fighting and preventive
effort; but I found that if one fought fairly he was
accorded consideration and opportunity. I introduced
a charter amendment that seemed very desirable, and
it found favor. The charter prescribed a two-year
term for eighteen supervisors and their election each
alternate year. Under the provision it was possible
to have every member without experience. By making
the term four years and electing nine members every
other year experience was assured, and the ballot would
be half the length, a great advantage. It had
seemed wise to me to allow the term of the mayor to
remain two years, but the friends of Mayor McCarthy
were so confident of his re-election that they insisted
on a four-year term. As so amended the matter
went to the people and was adopted. At the following
election Mayor James Rolph, Jr., was elected for four
years, two of which were an unintentional gift of his
political opponents.
I served for four years under the
energetic Rolph, and they were fruitful ones.
Most of the plans inaugurated by the Taylor board were
carried out, and materially the city made great strides.
The Exposition was a revelation of what was possible,
and of the City Hall and the Civic Center we may well
be proud.
Some of my supervisorial experiences
were trying and some were amusing. Discussion
was often relieved by rare bits of eloquence and surprising
use of language. Pronunciation was frequently
original and unprecedented. Amazing ignorance
was unconcealed and the gift of gab was unrestrained.
Nothing quite equaled in fatal facility a progress
report made by a former member soon after his debut:
“We think we shall soon be able to bring chaos
out of the present disorder, now existing.”
On one of our trips of investigation the City Engineer
had remarked on the watershed. One of the members
later cornered him and asked “Where is the watershed?”
expecting to be shown a building that had escaped his
attention.
A pleasant episode of official duty
early in Rolph’s term was an assignment to represent
the city at a national municipal congress at Los Angeles.
We were called upon, in connection with a study of
municipal art, to make an exhibit of objects of beauty
or ornament presented to the city by its citizens.
We felt that San Francisco had been kindly dealt with,
but were surprised at the extent and variety of the
gifts. Enlarged sepia photographs of structures,
monuments, bronzes, statuary, and memorials of all
kinds were gathered and framed uniformly. There
were very many, and they reflected great credit and
taste. Properly inscribed, they filled a large
room in Los Angeles and attracted much attention.
Interest was enhanced by the cleverness of the young
woman in charge. The general title of the collection
was “Objects of Art Presented by its Citizens
to the City of San Francisco.” She left
a space and over a conspicuous panel printed the inscription
“Objects of Art Presented by its Citizens to
the City of Los Angeles.” The panel was
empty. The ordinarily proud city had nothing to
show.
Moses at Pisgah gazed upon the land
he was not to enter. My Pisgah was reached at
the end of 1916. My halls of service were temporary.
The new City Hall was not occupied until just after
I had found my political Moab; the pleasure of sitting
in a hall which is pronounced the most beautiful in
America was not for me.
As I look back upon varied public
service, I am not clear as to its value; but I do
not regret having tried to do my part. My practical
creed was never to seek and never to decline opportunity
to serve. I feel that the effort to do what I
was able to do hardly justified itself; but it always
seemed worth trying, and I do not hold myself responsible
for results. I am told that in parts of California
infinitesimal diatoms form deposits five thousand feet
in thickness. If we have but little to give we
cannot afford not to give it.