diff options
Diffstat (limited to '2896.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 2896.txt | 11305 |
1 files changed, 11305 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/2896.txt b/2896.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..106f726 --- /dev/null +++ b/2896.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11305 @@ +The Project Gutenberg Etext of The California Legislature of 1909 + + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check +the laws for your country before redistributing these files!!! + +Please take a look at the important information in this header. +We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an +electronic path open for the next readers. + +Please do not remove this. + +This should be the first thing seen when anyone opens the book. +Do not change or edit it without written permission. The words +are carefully chosen to provide users with the information they +need about what they can legally do with the texts. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations* + +Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and +further information is included below. We need your donations. + +Presently, contributions are only being solicited from people in: +Texas, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, South Dakota, +Iowa, Indiana, and Vermont. As the requirements for other states +are met, additions to this list will be made and fund raising will +begin in the additional states. These donations should be made to: + +Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +PMB 113 +1739 University Ave. +Oxford, MS 38655 + + +Title: Story of the Session of the California Legislature of 1909 + +Author: Franklin Hichborn + +Release Date: November, 2001 [Etext #2896] +[Yes, we are about one year ahead of schedule] + +Edition: 10 + +The Project Gutenberg Etext of The California Legislature of 1909 +******This file should be named 2896.txt or 2896.zip******* + +This Project Gutenberg Etext Prepared by David Schwan + +Project Gutenberg Etexts are usually created from multiple editions, +all of which are in the Public Domain in the United States, unless a +copyright notice is included. Therefore, we usually do NOT keep any +of these books in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +We are now trying to release all our books one year in advance +of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing. +Please be encouraged to send us error messages even years after +the official publication date. + +Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. + +Most people start at our sites at: +https://gutenberg.org +http://promo.net/pg + + +Those of you who want to download any Etext before announcement +can surf to them as follows, and just download by date; this is +also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the +indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an +announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter. + +http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext01 +or +ftp://metalab.unc.edu/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext01 + +Or /etext00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90 + +Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want, +as it appears in our Newsletters. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours +to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour this year as we release fifty new Etext +files per month, or 500 more Etexts in 2000 for a total of 3000+ +If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total +should reach over 300 billion Etexts given away by year's end. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext +Files by December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000 = 1 Trillion] +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users. + +At our revised rates of production, we will reach only one-third +of that goal by the end of 2001, or about 3,333 Etexts unless we +manage to get some real funding. + +Something is needed to create a future for Project Gutenberg for +the next 100 years. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +Presently, contributions are only being solicited from people in: +Texas, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, South Dakota, +Iowa, Indiana, and Vermont. As the requirements for other states +are met, additions to this list will be made and fund raising will +begin in the additional states. + +All donations should be made to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation and will be tax deductible to the extent +permitted by law. + +Mail to: + +Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +PMB 113 +1739 University Avenue +Oxford, MS 38655 [USA] + +We are working with the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation to build more stable support and ensure the +future of Project Gutenberg. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +You can get up to date donation information at: + +https://www.gutenberg.org/donation.html + + +*** + +You can always email directly to: + +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +hart@pobox.com forwards to hart@prairienet.org and archive.org +if your mail bounces from archive.org, I will still see it, if +it bounces from prairienet.org, better resend later on. . . . + +We would prefer to send you this information by email. + + +Example command-line FTP session: + +ftp metalab.unc.edu +login: anonymous +password: your@login +cd pub/docs/books/gutenberg +cd etext90 through etext99 or etext00 through etext01, etc. +dir [to see files] +get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] +GET GUTINDEX.?? [to get a year's listing of books, e.g., GUTINDEX.99] +GET GUTINDEX.ALL [to get a listing of ALL books] + + +**The Legal Small Print** + + +(Three Pages) + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etexts, +is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart +through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project"). +Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext +under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market +any commercial products without permission. + +To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this +etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors, +officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost +and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or +indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause: +[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification, +or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word + processing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the etext (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the + gross profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation" + the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were + legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent + periodic) tax return. Please contact us beforehand to + let us know your plans and to work out the details. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time, +public domain etexts, and royalty free copyright licenses. +If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or +software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at: +hart@pobox.com + +*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.07.00*END* + + + + + +This Project Gutenberg Etext Prepared by David Schwan + + + + + +Story of the Session of the California Legislature of 1909 + +by Franklin Hichborn + + + +The well-being of the State requires that the opponents to the machine +in Senate and Assembly, regardless of party label, organize the +Legislature. But back of this is the even more important requirement +that there be elected to the Legislature American citizens, with the +responsibility of their citizenship upon them, rather than partisans, +burdened, until their good purposes are made negative, by the +responsibility of their partisanship. + + + +San Francisco +Press of The James H. Barry Company +1909 + + + +CONTENTS + +Chapter + +I. Breaking Ground +II. Organization of the Senate +III. Organization of the Assembly +IV. The Machine in Control +V. Election of United States Senator +VI. The Anti-Racetrack Gambling Bill +VII. Passage of the Anti-Racetrack Gambling Bill +VIII. The Direct Primary Bill +IX. The Machine Defeated in the Senate +X. Fight Over the Assembly Amendments +XI. Machine Amends Direct Primary Bill +XII. The Railroad Regulation Issue +XIII. Machine Defeats the Stetson Bill +XIV. Railroad Measures +XV. Defeat of the Commonwealth Club Bills +XVI. How the Change of Venue Bill Was Passed +XVII. Passage of the Wheelan Bills +XVIII. Defeat of the Local Option Bill +XIX. Defeat of the Initiative Amendment +XX. Defeat of the Anti-Japanese Bills +XXI. The Rule Against Lobbying +XXII. The Machine Lobbyist at Work +XXIII Influence of the San Francisco Delegation +XXIV. Attacks on and Defense of the Fish Commission +XXV. The Rewarding of the Faithful +XXVI. The Holdover Senators +XXVII. The Retiring Senators +XXVIII. Conclusion +Appendix +Tables of Votes +Postal Direct Primary +Dr. Montgomery's Report +The Anti-Japanese Resolution + + + +PREFACE. + +In writing the Story of the Session of the California Legislature of +1909, the purpose has been, not only to show what was done at Sacramento +last Winter, but, what is by far more important, how it was done. To +this end, the several measures are divided under three heads, namely, +those dealing with moral, with political and with industrial issues. +Instead of scattering on all the measures introduced, or even a +considerable part of them, the principal issue of each group, that which +meant the most to The People, and upon which the machine centered its +efforts, has been selected for detailed consideration. On the score of +the moral issues, the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill has been taken as the +most important; while the Direct Primary bill is dealt with as the chief +political issue, and the railroad regulation measures as involving the +chief industrial issue. The story of the fight over these bills is the +story of the session of 1909. The events attending the passage of the +Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill, the amendment of the Direct Primary bill, +and the defeat of the Stetson Railroad Regulation bill, with the +attending incident of the passage of the Wright Railroad bill, show, as +nothing else can, how the machine controls and manipulates a +Legislature - and such is the purpose of this little volume. + +The efforts of justice-loving men to simplify the criminal codes, to the +end that rich and poor alike may have equal opportunity in the trial +courts - not in theory alone but in fact - and the successful efforts of the +machine to block this reform, have made detailed consideration of the +defeat of the Commonwealth Club bills and the passage of the Wheelan +bills, and the so-called Change of Venue bill timely. And the story of +these measures illustrates again how the machine element defeats the +purpose of The People, and overrides what are the constitutional +rights - and should be rights in fact - of every American citizen. + +Measures which involved no particular contest between the good +government and the machine forces - measures patched up by interested +parties and slipped through the Legislature without opposition and +generally without comment - although many of them of great importance, are +not touched upon. The histories of those selected for consideration show +the machine, or if you like, the system, at its work of passing +undesirable measures, and of blocking the passage of good measures. If +the Story of the Session of the California Legislature of 1909 assist +the citizens of California to understand how this is done; if it give +them that knowledge of the weakness, the strength, the purposes, and the +affiliations of the Senators and Assemblymen who sat in the Legislature +of 1909, a knowledge of which the machine managers have had heretofore a +monopoly; if it point the way for a new method of publicity to crush +corruption and to promote reform - a way which others better prepared for +the work than I, may, in California and even in other States, follow - the +labor of preparing this volume for the press will have been justified. + +Franklin Hichborn. + +Santa Clara, Cal., July 4, 1909. + + + +Chapter I. + + + + +Breaking Ground. + +Although the Reform Element had a Majority in Both Senate and Assembly, +Good Bills Were Defeated, and Vicious Measures Passed - Three Reasons for +This: (1) Reform Element Was Without Plan of Action, (2) Was Without +Organization; (3) The Machine Was Permitted to Organize Both Senate and +Assembly. + + + +The personnel of the California Legislature of 1909, was, all things +considered, better than that of any other Legislature that has assembled +in California in a decade or more. There were, to be sure, in both +Senate and Assembly men who were constantly on the wrong side of every +question affecting the moral, political or industrial well-being of the +State, but a majority of each House labored for the passage of good +laws, laws which would not only silence and satisfy constituents, but +prove effective and accomplish the purpose for which they had been +drawn. Just as earnestly as they worked for the passage of good laws, a +majority of the members of the Senate as well as a majority of the +members of the Assembly opposed the passage of vicious measures, and of +measures ostensibly introduced to work needed reform but drawn in such a +manner as to be, from a practical standpoint, ineffective. + +And yet, regardless of the purpose of this majority, the so-called +"Change of Venue" [1] bill was passed, and the "Judicial Column" bill, +intended to take the Judiciary out of politics, was denied passage. The +infamous "Wheelan bills," aimed at the complication of the Grand jury +system, went through both Houses, while the Commonwealth Club bills, +drawn to simplify the methods of criminal procedure, were held up and +eventually defeated. The ineffective Wright Railroad Regulation bill +became a law, while the Stetson Railroad measure effective as finally +amended - was rejected. The provision in the Direct Primary bill for the +selection of United States Senators by State-wide vote was stricken out, +and the meaningless advisory, district vote plan substituted. + +Certainly, the accomplishment of the Legislature does not line with the +purpose of a majority of its members. The voter is naturally asking why +the majority in both Houses standing for good legislation and opposing +bad, accomplished so little; how it was that a minority, at practically +every turn, defeated a majority. + +There were three principal reasons for this outcome. + +(1) The machine, as its name indicates, is a definite organization, with +recognized leaders. The anti-machine element was without organization or +recognized leaders. + +(2) The reform-advocating majority, except in the anti-racetrack +gambling fight, was without definite plan of action. The majority was, +for example, for the passage of a direct primary law that would, first, +take the control of politics out of the hands of political bosses big +and little, and, second, give the people of California the privilege of +naming their United States Senators, a privilege already enjoyed by the +people of the more progressive States of the Union. But the reform +element knew little or nothing of the details of direct primary +legislation. + +They were equally unprepared on other reform issues. They recognized the +necessity of passing an effective railroad regulation law, for example, +but had little or no conception of what the provisions of the measure +should be. They recognized that the criminal laws cannot be impartially +enforced against rich and poor alike until the methods of criminal +procedure be simplified, put on a common sense basis. But even here they +had no definite policy and when told by machine claquers that the +proposed reforms were revolutionary, even the most insistent of the +reform element were content to let the simplifying amendments to the +codes die in committees or on the files. + +On the other hand, the machine element, even before a member had reached +Sacramento, had their work for the session carefully outlined. This +session the bulk of the machine's work was negative; that is to say, +with a majority in both houses opposed to machine policies, the machine +recognized the difficulties of passing bad laws except by trick - and +spent the session in amending good measures into ineffectiveness, or, +where they could, in preventing their passage. Down to a comma the +machine leaders knew what they wanted for a direct primary law, for an +anti-racetrack gambling law, for a railroad regulation law. From the +hour the Legislature opened until the gavels fell at the moment of +adjournment the machine element labored intelligently and constantly, +and as an organized working unit, to carry its ends. There were no false +plays; no waste of time or energy; every move was calculated. By +persistent hammering the organized machine minority was able to wear its +unorganized opponents out.[2] + +(3) The third reason for the failure of the reform majority is found in +the fact that the minority was permitted to organize both Senate and +Assembly. In the Assembly the machine element named the Speaker without +serious opposition. The Speaker named the Assembly committees. It +developed at the test that the important committees of the Assembly +were, generally speaking, controlled by the machine. + +The Lieutenant-Governor is, under the State Constitution, presiding +officer of the Senate, under the title of President of the Senate. But +the Senators elect the President pro tem., who, in the absence of the +President, has the same power as the President. The reform element, +although in the majority, permitted the election of Senator Edward I. +Wolfe as President pro tem. Wolfe was admittedly leader of the machine +element in the Senate. At critical times during the session, the fact +that both the President and President pro tem. of the Senate were +friendly to machine interests gave the machine great advantage over its +anti-machine opponents.[3] + +The reform majority in the Senate made the further mistake of leaving +the appointment of the Senate committees in the hands of +Lieutenant-Governor Warren Porter. Governor Porter flaunts his machine +affiliations; is evidently proud of his political connections; indeed, +in an address delivered before the students of the University of +California, Porter advised his hearers to be "performers" in politics +rather than "reformers." It was not at all surprising, then, that the +Senate committees were appointed, not in the interest of the reform +element, but of the machine. And yet, the reform element, being in the +majority, could have taken the appointment of the committees out of +Porter's hands. In the concluding chapter it will be shown there is +ample precedent for such a course. But the reform element let the +opportunity pass, and Warren Porter named the committees. Thus in both +Senate and Assembly the strategic committee positions were permitted to +fall into machine hands. + +The importance of this on legislation can scarcely be over-estimated. +Under the system in vogue in California, the real work of a legislative +session is done in committee. When a bill is introduced in either House, +it is at once referred to a committee. Until the committee reports on +the measure no further action can be taken. Thus a committee can prevent +the passage of a bill by deliberately neglecting to report it back to +the main body. + +When a measure passes either Senate or Assembly, it goes to the other +House, and is once again referred to a committee. Again does the fate of +the bill hang on committee action. Thus, every measure before it can +pass the Legislature must, in the ordinary course of legislation, pass +the scrutiny of two legislative committees, either one of which may +delay its passage or even deny Senate or Assembly, or both, opportunity +to act upon it. + +To be sure, one of the rules of the Assembly of 1909 required that all +bills referred to committees should be reported back within ten days, +while the Senate rules provided that committees must act on bills +referred to them as soon as "practicable," with the further provision +that a majority vote of the Senate could compel a report on a bill at +any time. But these rules were employed to little advantage. In the +Assembly, for example, the Commonwealth Club bills, referred to the +Judiciary Committee on January 15, were not acted upon by the committee +at all. These bills, in spite of the ten days' rule, remained in the +committee sixty-seven days. The Direct primary bill was held up in the +Senate Committee on Election Laws from January 8 until February 16, and +at that late day came out of the committee with practically unfavorable +recommendation. It was noticeable that few, if any, important reform +measures were given favorable recommendation by a Senate committee. Thus +the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill, the Direct Primary bill, the Local +Option bill, received the stamp of Senate committee disapproval. They +were returned to the Senate with the recommendation that they do not +pass. The same is largely true of the action of the Assembly +Committees.[4] + +If machine-controlled committees could delay action on reform measures, +they could at the same time expedite the passage of bills which the +machine element favored, or which had been amended to the machine's +liking. Thus the Change of Venue bill, which reached the Senate on March +15, was returned from the Senate Judiciary Committee the day following, +March 16, with the recommendation that it "do pass." The Wheelan bills +reached the Senate on March 17, and were at once referred to the +Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee that very day reported them +back with favorable recommendation. Had they been delayed in the +committee even 48 hours, their final passage would have been improbable. + +Curiously enough, the Judiciary Committee was the one Senate committee +whose members President Porter did not name. Following a time-honored +custom, every attorney at law in the Senate was made a member of the +committee. It so happened that ten of the nineteen lawyers in the Senate +were on the side of reform as against machine policies, eight generally +voted with the machine, while the nineteenth gave evidence of being in a +state of chronic doubt. This gave the reform element a majority of the +Senate Judiciary Committee. But President Porter had the naming of the +chairman of the committee, and the order of the rank of its members. The +Lieutenant-Governor's fine discrimination is shown by the fact that the +Chairman of the Committee and the four ranking members were counted on +the side of the machine. + +The Assembly committees acted quite as expeditiously on measures which +had passed the Senate in a form satisfactory to machine interests. Thus, +the Wright Railroad Regulation bill, which reached the Assembly on March +12, was reported back to the Assembly by the Assembly Committee on +Common Carriers the day following, March 13. + +It will be seen that the reform majority unquestionably weakened its +position by permitting the machine minority to organize the Legislature. +This phase of the problem which confronts the State will be dealt with +in the concluding chapter. + +[1] One of the best witnesses to the viciousness of this measure is +Governor Gillett, surely an unprejudiced observer. In giving his reasons +for vetoing the bill, Governor Gillett said: + +"I have several reasons for saying that I will veto the bill. One reason +is that I have always been opposed to it. When I was in the Senate in +1897 I was against it and again in 1899 I fought it in the Judiciary +Committee. Two years ago I ignored another such measure that had passed +through the Legislature, so that I would not be living up to my policy +of the past if I should sign this bill." + +"But even if I had never had the opportunity to record my opposition on +these different occasions, I should have vetoed the bill anyway, because +it is a vicious bill. The bill is not a change of venue bill in the +strict sense of the word. It simply gives the man on trial the right to +disqualify the Judge on the ground of bias on the slightest pretext." + +"The worst feature about the bill is that it grants this right to the +accused after the jury has been secured. Why, if the defendant didn't +like the adverse rulings of the Judge he could easily claim bias and the +law would upheld his demand for another Judge. Think of how that would +operate in the Calhoun trial in San Francisco. Such a law would cost the +State thousands of dollars. It's vicious and I will not sign it." + +[2] Most suggestively shown in the amendment of the Direct Primary bill. + +[3] The seriousness of the mistake made by the reform element in +acquiescing in Wolfe's election, was emphasized at the time of the +deadlock in the Senate over the Direct Primary bill. The President of +the Senate, Lieutenant-Governor Porter - and in his absence the +President pro tem., Wolfe, - was charged with the duty of calling the +Senate to order. Inasmuch as it did not suit the machine's interests +that the Senate should be called to order, the Senators were obliged to +sit in idleness for hours at a time, while the machine leaders and +lobbyists were working openly on the floor of the Senate to force +certain of the pro-primary Senators to join the machine forces. Had +the President pro tem. been one of the group of Senators who were +opposing the machine he would have called the Senate to order, thus +permitting the regular work of the session to proceed. See Chapter 10, +"Fight on Assembly Amendments." + +[4] The action of the Assembly Committee on Public Morals on the +Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill was a notable exception to this. See +chapters 6 and 7. + + + +Chapter II. + + + +Organization of the Senate. + +Anti-Machine Republicans, Led Into a Caucus Trap, Surrendered the +Appointment of President Pro Tem., Secretary and Sergeant-at-Arms to the +Machine - Machine Given the Selection of the Standing Committees. + + + +In the light of the events of the session, the division between the +machine or "organization" and anti-machine forces in the Senate for +purposes of organization may be regarded as follows: + +Anti-machine - Anthony[5], Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Burnett[5], +Cutten, Estudillo, Hurd[5], Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Strobridge, +Thompson, Walker (labeled Republicans), Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, +Holohan, Miller, Sanford (labeled Democrats) - 21. + +Machine - Hare, Kennedy (labeled -Democrats), Bates, Bills, Finn, +Hartman, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, McCartney, Reily, Savage, Weed, +Willis, Wolfe, Wright (labeled Republicans) - 16. + +Doubtful - Curtin (Democrat). + +Seekers of the winning side - Price and Welch (labeled Republicans). + +Curtin is put down as doubtful because, justly or unjustly, he was at +the opening of the session so regarded. But Curtin's record shows that +generally speaking from the beginning to the end of the session he voted +with the anti-machine element. Had the anti-machine forces made a +determined effort to organize the Senate and demonstrated a strength of +twenty-one votes, which would have been enough to organize,. Curtin +would certainly have been with them. The same is true of Welch, and it +is probably true of Price. This would have given the anti-machine forces +from twenty-two to twenty-four votes, a safe margin to have permitted +them to organize the Senate to carry out anti-machine policies. + +The machine claquers will no doubt point gleefully to the fact that when +the test on the Railroad Regulation bills came, Anthony, Burnett, +Estudillo, Hurd and Walker strayed from the anti-machine fold. This +objection would have more weight had there ever been an anti-machine +fold. As a matter of fact, the anti-machine element in the Senate from +the day the session opened until it closed was unorganized, and without +leaders or detailed plan of action. + +Admittedly Estudillo and Burnett strayed on the railroad regulation +question, but they did so believing the absolute rate provided in the +Stetson bill to be unconstitutional. All this will be brought out in the +chapters on railroad regulation measures, but in passing, it may be said +that Burnett, in the closing hours of the session, stated on the floor +of the Senate that he had voted against the Stetson bill and for the +Wright bill on the understanding that a constitutional amendment would +be passed setting at rest all question of the constitutionality of the +absolute rate. The machine leaders misled Senator Burnett. Machine votes +defeated the amendment. + +Anthony, Estudillo and Walker stood out against the machine in the +direct primary fight which followed the defeat of the Stetson bill, and +before the fight was over, Burnett had returned to the anti-machine +forces. + +The case of Senator Hurd is not at all creditable to the machine. But +Hurd's instincts and sympathies are not those of Gus Hartman, Hare, +Wolfe and Leavitt. Had the anti-machine forces had even semblance of +organization there would have been no straying, and the accomplishment +of the legislative session of 1909 would have been more satisfactory to +the best citizenship of the State. + +The fact that the anti-machine forces, without leaders and without +organization, stuck together so well as they did is one of the most +extraordinary and at the same time encouraging features of the session. + +Although the anti-machine forces numbered a majority of the Senate, +nevertheless a bare majority of the regular Republican Senators - those +who were eligible to admittance to the Republican caucus - were with the +machine. The division in the Republican caucus, counting Welch and Price +with the machine element, was on machine and anti-machine lines as +follows: + +Anti-machine - Anthony, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Burnett, Cutten, +Estudillo, Hurd, Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker +- 14. + +Machine - Bates, Pills, Finn, Hartman, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, +McCartney, Price, Reily, Savage, Weed, Welch, Willis, Wolfe, Wright - +16. + +By time-honored custom it has become a rule for the majority[5a] in the +Senate - and the same holds in the Assembly - to meet in caucus to +decide upon the details of organization. This is done on the theory that +the House should be so organized as to permit the majority to carry out +its policies as expeditiously and with as little friction as possible. +By the unwritten rule of the caucus, the majority governs and each +member who attends the caucus is bound in honor to vote - regardless of +his individual views or wishes - on the floor of the Senate or Assembly, +as the majority of the caucus decides. Thus, by going into caucus with +the sixteen machine Senators, the fourteen anti-machine Senators were +placed in a position where they were, under caucus rule, compelled to +vote on the floor of the Senate as the sixteen machine Senators +dictated. This gave the machine on the floor of the Senate thirty votes +out of forty on questions affecting organization, and permitted it to +name the President pro tem., the Secretary of the Senate, the +Sergeant-at-Arms, and gave it filial voice in the appointment of the +various attaches. + +Had the line of division in the Senate been Republican and Democratic, +the Republicans in the Senate might very properly have caucused. But +inasmuch as the machine Republicans stood during the entire session for +one set of policies, and the anti-machine Republicans for another, the +caucus was at best an incongruous affair. Especially is this true when +it is considered that the anti-machine Republicans immediately after +they had left the caucus united with the anti-machine Democrats in a +three-months contest with the united machine Democrats and machine +Republicans. But having surrendered the organization of the Senate to +the machine, the anti-machine Senators, although in the majority, fought +under a handicap, finally lost the weaker of their supporters[6], and in +the end went down in defeat. Had the real majority, rather than the +artificial majority, of the Senate caucused on organization, that is to +say, had the anti-machine Republicans and the anti-machine Democrats +caucused, and organized to carry out the policies for which they stood +and for which they fought together during the entire session, the +Republican-Democratic-machine element would have been defeated at every +turn. But no such policy governed, and the anti-machine Republicans +waddled after precedent into the caucus trap that had been set for them. +Later on in the session the anti-machine Republicans and anti-machine +Democrats did go into caucus together, and by doing so won the hardest +fought fight of the session.[7] + +In the Republican Senate caucus on organization, the machine Senators, +under the crafty leadership of Wolfe and Leavitt, worked their unhappy +anti-machine associates much as a playful cat, with a sense of humor, +toys with a mouse. As the cat lets the mouse think that it has escaped, +the machine let the anti-machine forces think they were organizing the +caucus. Leavitt had been leader of the Republican caucus at previous +sessions but he suffered "overwhelming defeat" at the hands of a +"reformer." The "reformer" in question was Senator Wright, who had been +well advertised as the father of the reform Direct Primary law. Before +the session closed, the anti-machine element was to learn just the sort +of "reformer" Wright is. Wright, however, in the interest of "harmony," +was nominated for caucus leadership by Senator Wolfe. Leavitt's name was +not even mentioned. The unanimous vote went to Senator Wright, who was +duly declared elected Chairman of the Senate Republican caucus for the +Thirty-eighth Session of the California Legislature. + +The reformers were also permitted to name the Secretary of the caucus. +This time a genuine anti-machine Senator was selected, A. E. Boynton. + +And then came a question which brought out the gleam of the machine's +teeth. Senator Boynton moved that Senator Bell, of Pasadena, be admitted +to the caucus. Somewhat to the discomfiture of the reformers, Bell was +not admitted. + +Senator Bell's case is a suggestive one. He is a Republican, having been +elected from one of the strongest Republican districts of the State, the +Thirty-sixth Senatorial District, which takes in Pasadena. But Senator +Bell was not named by the machine; in fact, he was elected as protest +against machine methods. The Pasadena Republicans tolerated machine +domination as long as they could. Then, in 1906, they induced Bell to +run against the "regular" machine nominee for the State Senate. Bell ran +as an independent Republican. He overwhelmingly defeated his machine +opponent. Arrived at Sacramento at the session of 1907, he applied for +admittance to the Republican caucus. + +There was ample precedent for his admittance, but curiously enough no +anti-machine Republican who had defeated a machine Republican had ever +been admitted to caucus privileges. In 1902, however, Charles M. +Shortridge, having failed to receive the nomination for the state Senate +from Santa Clara County, ran as an independent candidate against the +regular Republican nominee. The machine supported Shortridge's +candidacy, and by most questionable methods succeeded in defeating the +regular Republican. But Shortridge was admitted to the Senate caucus of +1903 without question. Senator Bell, however, was denied admittance to +the Republican Senate caucus of 1907, on the grounds that he had +defeated a regularly nominated Republican. Shortridge had defeated a +regularly nominated Republican. But Shortridge stood for machine +policies; Bell stands opposed to machine policies. The machine's policy +is to keep the caucuses of the dominant party in the Legislature as much +a close corporation as possible. So in 1907, Bell's application was +rejected. Bell, throughout the session, opposed machine policies. Both +for the session of 1907 and of 1909, Senator Bell's record is absolutely +clean. The machine does not approve such men, nor want them to +participate in party caucuses. + +Senator Bell, who had, although refused admittance to his party caucus, +done very well in 1907, did not propose to apply for admission to the +caucus of 1909. But the reform element in the Senate insisted upon +presenting his name. From machine sources it was intimated to Senator +Bell that if he would make his peace with Walter Parker, the Southern +Pacific lobbyist who acts as machine leader south of the Tehachepi, no +opposition would be offered his admission to the caucus. Bell rejected +the offer with characteristic promptness. So the anti-machine Senators, +since they had "organized the caucus," proceeded to admit Bell in the +face of machine opposition. + +But the inexperienced political mouse discovered that it was not out of +the reach of the claws of the experienced political cat. Boynton's +motion to admit Bell to the caucus was lost by a vote of 16 to 14. + +Had the reform element been organized, however, Bell would have been +admitted to the caucus. Three Senators, Reily, Savage and Welch, who +ordinarily voted with the machine, because of personal friendship voted +to admit Bell to the caucus. But their votes were offset by those of +Burnett, Estudillo and Hurd.[8] The vote was as follows: + +To admit Bell to the caucus - Anthony, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Cutten, +Reily, Roseberry, Rush, Savage, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker, +Welch - 14. + +Against admitting Bell to the caucus - Bates, Bills, Burnett, Estudillo, +Finn, Hartman, Hurd, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, McCartney, Price, Weed, +Willis, Wolfe, Wright - 16. + +The Bell matter out of the way, the real work of organizing the Senate +was taken up. Curiously enough, the only contest came over the election +of the Chaplain of the Senate; the naming of the President pro tem., of +the Secretary of the Senate and of the Sergeant-at-Arms was not opposed. +Senator Price moved that Lewis A. Hilborn be the caucus nominee for +Secretary of the Senate, and J. Louis Martin for Sergeant-at-Arms. His +motion carried unanimously. Price also nominated Senator Wolfe for +President pro tem. Not an anti-machine Senator protested. Wolfe was +accordingly declared the caucus nominee, with the thirty Senators +present, machine and anti-machine, obligated to vote for him on the +floor of the Senate. + +The election of a Chaplain was then taken up and several candidates +nominated for the office. Rev. Father H. H. Wyman being finally +selected, which, of course, was equivalent to election. + +The caucus was held at 9 o'clock of the morning of January 4. At noon of +the same day a second caucus was held at which it was decided that the +division of patronage[8a] should be on the following basis: That $18 a +day should be set aside for the Secretary, Sergeant-at-Arms and +Chaplain; that the Lieutenant-Governor should be allowed $22 a day, and +each of the thirty caucus Senators $15 a day. This practically concluded +Republican caucusing for the session. At previous sessions the +Republicans caucused practically every day. But before the session of +1909 had advanced far, the real line that divided the Senators, the line +that separated the machine from the anti-machine members, had become so +pronounced that caucuses of machine and anti-machine Republicans became +impracticable. Senator Wright, toward the end of the session, made +frantic efforts to get the caucus together; but he failed. The caucus on +organization was about all that the anti-machine Republicans could +stand. + +As they had left the election of the officers of the Senate to the +machine, the anti-machine element left the appointing of the Senate +committees to the machine Lieutenant-Governor.[9] + +How well the machine, given the appointment of the committees, fortified +itself is shown by consideration of practically any one of the +committees. A few examples will suffice. + +There were, for example, three great issues before the Legislature; +namely, the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill, a moral issue; the Direct +Primary bill, a political issue; and the Railroad Regulation bills, a +commercial issue. + +The Anti-Gambling bill was to come before the Public Morals Committee, +and the machine took good care that not an anti-machine Senator should +be given a place on that committee. The committee consisted of Weed, +Wolfe, Leavitt, Savage (labeled Republicans), Kennedy (labeled +Democrat), all machine men. The committee reported back the +Anti-Gambling bill under pressure, with the recommendation that it "do +not pass." Public opinion was such at the time that Savage and Kennedy +did not vote for the unfavorable recommendation. But Weed, Wolfe and +Leavitt, a majority of the committee, stood out against the bill until +the last. + +The Direct Primary bill was to be considered by the Election Laws +Committee and the machine took good care to keep hand upon that +committee. The committee was made up of seven machine and two +anti-machine Senators, as follows: + +Machine Senators - Leavitt, Hartman, Wolfe, Savage, Wright (labeled +Republicans), Kennedy and Hare (labeled Democrats). + +Every one of the seven opposed the State-wide plan for the selection of +United States Senators. + +The anti-machine Senators on the committee were Estudillo and Stetson. + +It is an open secret that the machine expected to control Estudillo +through Walter Parker, the Southern Pacific political agent. Its failure +brought some confusion upon machine circles. Thus, the machine really +thought when it picked the Committee on Election Laws that it controlled +eight of the nine members. + +The Railroad Regulation measures were to be passed upon by the Committee +on Corporations. The machine took care to be in control of that +committee. It consisted of eleven members. Seven of the eleven, if +Burnett who voted with the machine on this issue be counted with them, +were machine, one was "band wagon[10], which is a trifle worse than +machine, and three anti-machine, as follows: + +Machine - Bates, Wright, McCartney, Burnett, Bills, Finn (labeled +Republicans), Kennedy (labeled Democrat). + +Band wagon - Welch. + +Anti-machine - Walker, Roseberry (labeled Republicans), and Miller +(labeled Democrat). + +But here again the machine was more generous than it intended to be. It +figured on controlling Walker. But in the committee Walker stood out +manfully for the Stetson bill and against the Wright bill. On the floor +of the Senate, however, Walker made his one slip of the session, by +voting for the Wright bill and against the Stetson bill. + +It is not necessary to continue consideration of the committees. Enough +has been said to show how thoroughly the machine minority, given the +appointment of the committees, strengthened itself in the Senate by +seizing every strategic position. Indeed, the machine fortified itself +with such far-seeing intelligence, that one marvels that the +anti-machine majority was able to offer even temporarily effective +opposition. + + + +[5] Anthony's vote was in the majority of cases cast on the side of the +machine. But the determined stand that he took on the Direct Primary +bill issue, demonstrated that Anthony, had the anti-machine forces +maintained any sort of organization, or had they had definite plan of +action, would have been found consistently on the side of good +government. Burnett was unquestionably misled by the machine leaders. +Neither Burnett nor Anthony can be justly classed with Hartman, Wolfe, +Leavitt, Bills, etc., etc. Hurd, who toward the end of the session voted +constantly with the machine, and is considered hopeless by many +observers, nevertheless took active part in the anti-machine caucus on +the Direct Primary bill, and, had the organization of the Senate been in +the hands of the anti-machine element, the writer firmly believes, would +have continued with the reform forces. At any rate, he was available for +any anti-machine movement that might have been started to organize the +Senate. Hurd, like Burnett, will have his opportunity in 1911. Both +Senators hold over. + +[5a] In this instance, the Republican Senators. The Senate minority was +made up of the Democratic Senators, if we make the division on party +lines. But as a matter of fact, when it came to the real business of the +session, the Senate did not divide on party lines. The actual division +was between the machine and the anti-machine Senators. Thus the real +majority consisted of anti-machine Senators, and the minority of the +Senators controlled by the machine. + +[6] Hurd's case illustrates this very well. + +[7] See chapter nine - Machine defeated in the Senate. + +[8] Burnett of San Francisco, voted against Bell on partisan grounds, +and inability to grasp the situation. Estudillo's vote was inconsistent +with the majority which he cast during the session, while Hurd's was +inconsistent with those which he cast up to the time of his vote with +the machine forces against the Stetson bill. + +[8a] Up to the session of 1909, the members of the Legislature fixed the +amount of patronage. At the session of 1907, the payroll of the officers +and attaches of the Assembly alone ran up to nearly $10,000 a week, or +more than $1300 a day. But in 1908, the People adopted a constitutional +amendment limiting the amount of patronage, the money to be expended for +legislative officers and attaches, to $500 a day for each House. This +cut the Patronage down something more than one-half, which gave the +Senators and Assemblymen who divided it great concern. + +The development of the patronage scandal during the last decade is +interesting. At the session of 1901 the Assembly patronage ran about +$580 a day the Senate patronage about $610. This was only $80 a day more +in the Assembly, and $110 more in the Senate than the limit now fixed by +the Constitution. + +In 1903, the patronage in the Assembly totaled $6312.50 a week, more +than $900 a day. In the Senate it was $5612.50, or $800 a day. + +The increase continued in 1905. in that year Assembly Patronage totaled +$7956.50 a week, or $1135 a day, while the Senate patronage was $6002.50 +a week, or $857 a day. + +The climax came in 1907, when the Assembly patronage went to $9660.50 a +week, or $1350 a day, and the Senate patronage to to $6893.50 a week, or +$985 a day. What it would have been in 1909 had there been no +Constitutional restriction placed upon it, is a matter for speculation. + +[9] See concluding chapter as to how this could have been avoided. + +[10] The term "band wagon" was applied during the session to those +members who were in the habit of joining the winning side at the last +moment. + + + +Chapter III. + + + +Organization of the Assembly. + +Independent Movement to Resist the Machine's Program Failed - Reform +Element Rallied and Rejected Rules Prepared by Committee Appointed by +Stanton, Which Would Have Placed Majority at Mercy of the +Machine-Controlled Minority. + + + +The machine-free members of the Lower House at least did better than the +reformers in the Senate; they made an attempt to organize the Assembly +independent of the machine. The effort was, however, as uncertain as +that of a nestling taking its first lesson in flying. Nothing came of +the venture; but it indicates what may be done in future. + +The organization of the Assembly hinges on the election of the Speaker. +The machine ordinarily picks the Speaker before the November elections, +so his election need not stir up any particular enthusiasm. But there is +always something of a contest started - for the sake of appearances, +probably. + +This year the machine had picked Phil Stanton, of Los Angeles, for the +job, but Bob Beardslee, of Stockton, was permitted to give Stanton "a +run." + +The San Francisco newspapers along in November and December recorded the +political ripple of the contest, but the fight was a dead affair, and +nobody enthused. The play came to a tame ending when Beardslee nominated +Stanton for the Speaker's job and got the Chairmanship of the important +Committee on Ways and Means for being good, or taking program, however +one may view it. + +But at one time a real fight for the Speakership threatened. Assemblyman +Drew, of Fresno, and other stanch anti-machine men, conceived the +radical notion that it was idiotic for them to sit around like lambs +waiting to have their throats cut, while the machine organized the +House. They accordingly decided to take a hand in the organization of +the Assembly themselves by refusing to vote for any man for Speaker who +was known to be under the influence of the machine. + +Forty-one votes are required to elect the Speaker. The reformers figured +on the nineteen Democratic members as with them. The Lincoln-Roosevelt +League had elected Assemblymen from several counties, including Alameda. +These were naturally counted on. Other reputable Republican members were +expected to join the movement in numbers sufficient to secure the +necessary forty-one votes. + +The purpose of the leaders of this departure from the regular rules of +the political game should have commended itself to every good citizen. +Their idea was to organize the Assembly, not for self-advancement, or +the promotion of special privileges as the machine leaders do year after +year, but that good bills might be passed and bad bills defeated; that +the waste of the public funds might be stopped; that worthy citizenship +might be placed above predatory partisanship. And yet, they were +compelled to proceed with the utmost caution; were discouraged at every +turn, and abused like pickpockets, even by those upon whom they depended +for support. Gradually it dawned upon them that not a few of the +Democratic members were not in sympathy with reform legislation. But +more discouraging still was the fact that certain Republicans elected to +the Assembly by the Lincoln-Roosevelt faction of the party were as +little to be depended upon. By consulting the tables "B" and "C" of +Assembly votes in the appendix, it will be seen that Democrats like +Baxter, Collum, Hopkins, O'Neil and Wheelan, and Lincoln-Roosevelt +Republicans like Mott, Pulcifer and Feeley, as a general thing voted +with the machine Republicans. There were, to be sure, Democrats like +Gillis, Johnson of Placer, Juilliard, Maher, Mendenhall, Polsley, +Preston, Wilson, Odom and Stuckenbruck, who were against the machine on +every issue, but the record shows the utter foolishness of regarding +either party free of machine influences. Without being able to +understand just how it was, Mr. Drew and his associates failed to secure +the encouragement for their independent movement which they expected. +The stealthy move upon the Speaker's chair was found in some +unaccountable way to be blocked. Then some cautious soul suggested that +if they should fail the machine would hold up the appropriation bills of +those identified with the movement. That settled it. The attempt to +elect as Speaker some member free of machine influence ended right +there. The reformers skurried for cover. + +The part which the appropriation bills play in the enactment of bad laws +is one of the least understood of a legislative session. Each session +money must be appropriated by legislative enactment for the maintenance +and enlargement, where necessary, of the various State institutions, +such as hospitals for the insane, reform schools, normal schools, and +the like. These institutions are not local at all, but State. But the +Senators and Assemblymen from the counties in which they are situated +are, by custom, charged with the responsibility of securing the +appropriations necessary for their support. The San Jose Normal School, +for example, and the Agnew Asylum for the Insane, are situated in Santa +Clara County. They are no more Santa Clara County institutions than they +are Del Norte or San Diego institutions, but the Senators and +Assemblymen from Santa Clara County are held responsible for the passage +of the appropriation bills affecting them. Too often, the ability of the +Assemblyman or Senator is measured, not by his real work in the +Legislature, but by the size of the appropriations which he manages to +secure for his district. Under the present system by which the machine +organizes the Legislature, it is in a position to defeat or materially +reduce practically any appropriation bill. The member of the Legislature +who would oppose the machine thus finds himself between the constituents +at home, who demand that he secure generous appropriations for his +district, and the machine, which he understands very well requires +support of its policies as one of the prices of the constituent-demanded +appropriations. Thus those who would have opposed the machine in the +organization of the Assembly realized that failure would probably mean a +hammering of their appropriation bills, which would result in their +political undoing at home. So the independent movement to organize the +Assembly came to a sorry ending. + +Stanton was elected Speaker without opposition. The "defeated" Beardslee +placed him in nomination. Complete harmony prevailed. Stanton started +proceedings by appointing the Committee on Rules. This committee was +charged with drafting rules for the government of the Assembly during +the session. It was made up of Assemblymen Johnston of Contra Costa, +Transue, Johnson of Sacramento, Beardslee and Stanton. + +Without the people knowing much about what is going on, the rules +governing legislative bodies are being amended from time to time, so +that the power of influencing legislation is being taken out of the +hands of the duly elected representatives of the people and placed with +presiding officers and important committees. The "system," or the +machine, call it what you may, finds it easier to control presiding +officers and committees appointed by presiding officers, than to control +Legislatures. This stealthy advance upon the liberties of the people, +seems to have reached its climax at Washington, where the independent +members of both parties are in open revolt against "Cannonism." But +"Cannonism" is not confined to the National Congress alone; in a small +way it has its hold on the California Legislature. The rules prepared by +Speaker Stanton's committee were well calculated to give "Cannonism" a +stronger hold in California, which would have influenced not only the +session of 1909 but, as a precedent, many sessions to come.[11] The +proposed rules in saddling "Cannonism" upon the Assembly were well +calculated to strengthen the machine's grip upon the Legislature. + +The departure from the rules of 1907 was most radical. Under the rules +that governed the Assembly in 1907, committees were required to report +on each bill referred to them within ten days after the measure had been +submitted. + +The rules proposed by the committee provided that the report should be +made as soon as "practicable." + +The rules of 1907 provided that a mere majority could recall a bill from +committee. + +Under the proposed rules a two-thirds vote would have been necessary. + +Under the rules of 1907 a measure could be advanced on the files at the +request of its author. + +Under the committee's rules unanimous consent of the Assembly was made +necessary for such advancement. + +The proposed rules would have enabled the machine forces to smother in +committee any measure the machine wished to defeat. A two-thirds vote +would have been necessary to suspend the rules to have a bill recalled +from committee, that is to say, the votes of fifty-four Assemblymen. +Twenty-seven Assemblymen could then have held the measure in committee +until the session closed. + +Had the committee-prepared rules been adopted, the probabilities are +that the battleground of the session would have been transferred from +the Senate Chamber to the Assembly. + +But the proposed rules were not adopted. A fight against adopting the +committee's report was started by Drew of Fresno. Mr. Drew introduced a +resolution rejecting the rules submitted by the committee, and +substituting the rules of 1907, to govern the session of 1909. Johnson +of Sacramento led the defense that rallied to the committee's report. +But Johnson's wit failed against the argument which Drew, Callan, +Preston, Young and Cattell offered. The gentlemen denounced the rules +which the committee had offered as "vicious, despotic and gagging." +Drew's resolution was adopted by a vote of 41 to 32, the committee's +report rejected and the rules of 1907 accepted for the session of +1909[12]. It was a decided victory for the anti-machine forces, and +brought gloom to the scheming machine leaders. But it developed later +that not a few who had voted for the Drew resolution were safely +machine; while many who had voted against it were anti-machine, but had +voted against the resolution under misapprehension of just what it stood +for[13]. + +Although the reform majority in the Assembly could prevent the adoption +of the "gag rules," it could not, after it had failed to elect the +Speaker, govern the appointment of the committees. By and large, the +Assembly committees were controlled as were the Senate committees by +machine standbys. The Election Laws Committee, which was to pass upon +the Direct Primary bill, was safely in machine hands. Grove L. Johnson, +as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, herded the young lawyers thereon +like so many sheep. Johnson was in effect the committee. + +The Committee on Corporations and the Committee on Common Carriers, +before which railroad regulation bills might come, were safely in +majority for the machine. + +One apparent exception to the rule was the Committee on Public Morals, +which gave the Anti-Gambling bill its start toward passage. But this +committee, which did so much to secure the passage of the Anti-Gambling +bill, held up the Local Option bill at Speaker Stanton's request, until +the last week of the session, thus making its passage in the Assembly +impossible. + +A curious mistake was made by the machine, when Telfer of San Jose was +made Chairman of the Committee on Contingent Expenses. Telfer is not +only anti-machine, but possessed of a non-political honesty which proved +very distressing to the machine before the session was over. + +Telfer as Chairman of the committee refused to "O. K." extravagant +charges for the materials furnished the Assembly. As a result, bills for +hire of typewriters had to be reduced, pencils counted and other +astonishing reductions made. + +Telfer saved the State several hundred dollars, but caused many a +heartache. Telfer's appointment to a committee which he made important, +shows that the machine element as well as the anti-machine sometimes +makes mistakes. But in spite of its minor mistakes, in spite of the +anti-machine majority, so admirably did the machine organize the +Assembly for its purposes, that in the closing days of the session not +only were vicious measures passed without much difficulty, but the +Assembly was made the graveyard of good bills[14]. + + + +[11] If ever the People of California secure control of the State +Legislature through machine-free representatives with the courage to +dare and the ability to do, one of the most important pieces of work +will be to sweep aside the mass of precedent which the machine has for +years been gradually embodying into the rules of Senate and Assembly. +What is needed is a set of rules that shall promote the expression of +the wishes of the majority. The curse of technicality does not hamper +the Judiciary alone; it hampers the legislative branch of government as +well. Note Wolfe's ability to deadlock the Senate after the Assembly +Amendments to the Direct Primary bill had been rejected. Chapter XI. + +[12] The vote by which this was done was as follows: + +For the Drew resolution and against the committee rules: Assemblymen +Black, Bohnett, Callan, Cattell, Cogswell, Collum, Costar, Cronin, Drew, +Flint, Gibbons, Hammon, Hanlon, Hayes, Hewitt, Hinkle, Hopkins, Irwin, +Johnson of Placer, Juilliard, Lightner, Maher, Melrose, Mendenhall, +Odom, Otis, O'Neil, Polsley, Preston, Rech, Rutherford, Sackett, Silver, +Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Wagner, Webber, Wheelan, Whitney, Wilson and +Young. - 41. + +Against the Drew resolution and for the committee rules: Assemblymen +Barndollar, Beardslee, Beban, Coghlan, Collier, Cullen, Dean, Feeley, +Flavelle, Fleisher, Gerdes, Greer, Griffiths, Hans, Hawk, Holmquist, +Johnson of Sacramento, Johnson of San Diego, Johnston, Leeds, Macauley, +McClelland, McManus, Moore, Mott, Nelson, Perine, Pugh, Pulcifer, +Schmitt, Stanton, Transue - 32. + +[13] A gentleman who for a number of years has been identified with the +reform element in the Assembly, writes of this feature of the machine's +hold on the Legislature as follows: "One of the principal difficulties +with the Legislature as it is now constituted and has been for many +years past, is that the machine or organization always endeavors to +secure the election of young men who haven't very fixed opinions and who +are easily influenced; not knowing the machine tactics and the real +object behind the legislation they do not seem to see the necessity for +standing firm and for that reason are often led into voting for or +against measures which they would not were they more familiar with the +tricks of the machine men. A new grist of legislators is what the +organization is always looking for. They want a certain number of old +"stand-bys" who will do their dirty work for a mere pittance or some +paltry reward, real or anticipated, and with these men to influence and +control the younger members their purpose is easily, accomplished." + +[14] See Passage of Wheelan Bills, chapter XVII; Passage of Change of +Venue bill, chapter XVI. Examples of good bills defeated in the Assembly +in the closing days of the session were the Judicial Column bill, and +the Holohan measure removing the party circle from the election ballot. + + + +Chapter IV. + + + +The Machine in Control. + +Deliberately Held Up Measures in Committees Until the Close of the +Session, When Senate and Assembly Were Forced to Take Snap Judgment on +Hundreds of Measures - In the Confusion Thus Created, Good Bills Were +Defeated and Bad Ones Passed. + + + +The Legislature organized, the machine and anti-machine forces settled +down to the work of the session. The situation was unique. The +anti-machine element had a comfortable majority in the Assembly and at +least a bare majority in the Senate. But the machine controlled the +committees of both Houses, had selected the presiding officers, and had +dictated the selection of the majority of the attaches. When, for +example, it was suggested that in the event of a close vote in the +Senate on the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill, it might be found necessary +to send the Sergeant-at-Arms after Senators who might attempt to dodge +the vote, not a single attache of the Sergeant-at-Arms' office could be +named who was in sympathy with the movement against the gamblers. +Incidentally, however, it was discovered that the clerk of the important +Senate Enrolling and Engrossing Committee had been an employee at Frank +Daroux's notorious Sausalito poolrooms. These were disquieting +discoveries for the reform element. + +Although the machine controlled the strategic positions of the +organization of the Legislature, it was still in the minority in each +House. This meant that the machine could not, in open fight, pass a +vicious or undesirable measure, or put through any of its schemes. The +machine's course soon became apparent. If the machine could not put laws +on the statute books to its liking, it could block the passage of good +measures. Having crafty leaders in both Senate and Assembly, and, above +all, controlling the committees, the machine was admirably prepared to +do this. By employing delaying tactics which would have done credit to a +specialist in criminal defense, the machine devoted the first two months +of the session to the blocking of legislation. + +The methods employed were very simple. As soon as a bill was introduced +it was referred to a committee of the House in which it originated. The +committee would hold the measure until the reform element gave +indications of protesting[15]. The bill would then be returned. If +possible it would be further delayed by amendment on second or third +reading. If finally passed by the House of its origin, it would be sent +to the other House, where it would be referred to a committee. In the +majority of cases the committee could hold it indefinitely. In such +cases as the committees were forced to report on measures that had +passed the other House, the measure would be amended, which necessitated +its being reprinted, and again acted upon by the House of its +origin[16], all of which made for delay. + +But it must not be thought that the Senate and Assembly were left in +idleness during the first two months of the session. Such is by no means +the case; Senators and Assemblymen never worked harder. The machine +leaders during the first month of the session craftily kept the members +wrangling in committees. During the second month the Senate was kept +working day and night passing comparatively unimportant Senate bills, +and the Assembly working as hard passing Assembly bills; but the Senate +passed very few Assembly bills and the Assembly very few Senate bills. +As a measure must pass both Houses to become a law, few bills were sent +to the Governor for his approval. Thus during the first two months of +the session many bills passed in one house or the other, but pitifully +few passed the Legislature. + +The reform element, working sixteen hours a day not unlike so many mice +in a wheel, were apparently in complete ignorance of the situation which +they were creating. Senators whose bills had passed the Senate began to +complain that they could not get the measures out of the Assembly +committee; Assemblymen whose measures had passed the Assembly were as +loud in their charges that their bills were being held up in Senate +committees. The machine actually turned this early dissatisfaction to +its advantage. Soon it was being announced on the floor of the Assembly: +"If Senate committees will not act on Assembly bills, then the Assembly +committees will not act on Senate bills." The Senate made the same +threats as to Assembly bills. So, for about a week, Senate committees +openly slighted Assembly bills, while Assembly committees in retaliation +slighted Senate bills. The situation was very amusing; it was, too, +highly satisfactory to the machine. + +About the first week in March - the Legislature adjourned March 24 - the +anti-machine members awoke to the fact that in spite of their day and +night sessions, little had been accomplished. The further disquieting +discovery was made that the bulk of the Assembly bills which had passed +the Assembly were being held in Senate committees, while the Senate +bills which had passed the Senate, were apparently anchored in Assembly +committees, and that the machine controlled the committees. The reform +members of each House had good cause for alarm. Every Senator and +Assemblyman has his "pet" measures. The reform Senators and Assemblymen +found that to get their bills out of committees they would have to treat +with the machine. Such a Senator or Assemblyman, with his constituents +clamoring for the passage of a bill held up in a machine-controlled +committee, had some claim to pardon if he turned suddenly attentive to +the machine olive branch. And the machine, by the way, always has the +olive branch out. Stand in with us, is their constant advance, and we +will see you through. + +As a result of these delaying tactics, literally hundreds of bills which +had needlessly been held up in committees were forced upon the +consideration of the Senate during the last three weeks of the session. +Each House made records of passing more than 100 bills a day. There was +little pretense of reading the measures as required by the State +Constitution. The clerk at the desk mumbled over their titles; they were +voted upon and became laws. In the rush to get through, as will be shown +by example in other chapters, Senators and Assemblymen voted for +measures to which they were openly opposed. The machine minority was +merely reaping the benefits of a situation which the cleverness of its +leaders had created. + +Although machine-advocated and unimportant measures could be passed in +such a situation, bills which the machine opposed could not be[17]. +Machine-opposed measures were either held up in committees until their +passage was out of the question, or they were denied consideration in +Senate or Assembly, or their advocates worn out by the tactics of the +machine leaders. Senate Bill 220, which removed the party circle from +the election ballot, passed in the Senate after a bitter contest, was +held up in the Assembly until five days before adjournment, and then +denied a second reading. Boynton's Senate Bill 249, providing for the +arrangement of judicial candidates on the ballot without designation of +party affiliations, intended to take the Judiciary out of politics, +which after a long contest passed the Senate, was held up in the +Assembly until the day before adjournment, when it was denied passage. +This bill was introduced in the Senate on January 12. So popular was it, +such was the demand for its passage, that it was not openly opposed. It +was finally defeated on March 23, the day before adjournment. Thus two +months and eleven days were required to wear out its advocates. + +About March 1, the machine began to crowd the anti-machine element for +early adjournment. At that time not far from 2000 bills were recorded in +the Senate and Assembly histories. The action had the effect of a good +stiff push to a man sliding down hill; the anti-machine forces had the +votes to prevent adjournment but the machine's adjournment plans added +considerably to anti-machine discomfiture. Senator Wolfe actually gave +notice that on Friday, March 5, he would move that the Legislature +adjourn on March 13. This would have given a fortnight for consideration +of nearly 2000 bills. At the time of Wolfe's motion, there were pending +the Direct Primary bill, the Railroad Regulation bills, the Commonwealth +Club bills, the Islais Creek Harbor bills, and scores of other important +measures, the passage of which had unnecessarily - albeit most cleverly +- been delayed. + +As a result of clever manipulation, dating from the first day of the +session, the machine was thus in the closing days, in spite of the +majority against it, able to pass, amend or defeat measures, pretty much +as its leaders desired. The anti-machine forces, Republican and +Democratic, were during those last days, merely reaping the harvest +which they had sown when they permitted the Democratic-Republican +machine to take the organization of the Legislature out of their hands. + + + +[15] The Senate Committee on Election Laws, for example, held the Direct +Primary bill for thirty-eight days, and finally reported it back so +amended that it had to be rewritten. See chapters VI and VII on efforts +of the machine to hold the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill in committee. + +[16] It was stated on the floor of the Assembly, that were the Ten +Commandments to be adopted by the Assembly, the Senate would find some +excuse for amending them. + +[17] The most astonishing example of this was furnished by the passage +of the Change of Venue bill in the Senate. See chapter XVI. + + + +Chapter V. + + + +Election of United States Senator. + +Opposition to Perkins Overcome by the Dead Weight of the Machine +- Movement Against His Re-election Failed for Want of Leadership +- Proceedings Without Warmth or Enthusiasm. + + + +No funeral was ever attended by greater somberness than was the +re-election of George C. Perkins to the United States Senate, January +12-13, 1909. The nominating speeches were made without enthusiasm; not a +cheer greeted Senator or Assemblyman charged with the task of putting +the aged Senator in nomination. Pulcifer of Alameda, who made the +nominating speech in the Assembly, was received with icy calmness. Even +when the Alamedan referred to the veteran Senator as "one whose hair has +grown white and whose eyes have grown dim in the service of his +country," not so much as a ripple of applause stirred the chamber. When +the speaker concluded his review of the Senator's life and political +career, the incipient murmur of approval which somebody started died +away for want of vitality. + +In the Senate, the task of nominating Perkins fell to Stetson of +Alameda. But Stetson's nominating speech was received with no more +enthusiasm than was that of the shifty Pulcifer. The "system," the +"organization," the "machine," have it as you will, returned George C. +Perkins to the United States Senate. The people of California had no +voice in it, nor, for that matter, the Legislature, although the +majority of the Legislature was opposed to the machine. In carrying out +the ignoble part prepared for them - prepared for them by the "machine" +which a majority of them opposed - the members of Senate and Assembly +went through the forms prescribed without a hand clap and without a +cheer. + +But it must not be thought that the re-election of Senator Perkins was +without opposition. Indeed, it met with the same sort of honest but +ineffective resistance that attended the election of Stanton to the +Speakership of the Lower House. And like the campaign against Stanton +the opposition to Perkins got nowhere because of the lack of leadership, +organization and plan of action on the part of the resisting +legislators. + +The machine had been preparing for Perkins' re-election for months; but +the opposition to Perkins made no move until after the November +elections. + +The first outward sign of opposition came from Assemblyman E. J. Callan +of the Thirty-ninth District, the fighting reform district of San +Francisco. Callan, three or four weeks before the Legislature convened, +fell into a trap which the wily Alameda County politician had set some +time previous. Perkins had long before invited criticism of his +"record," which meant his votes on issues that had been passed upon by +the United States Senate. As a matter of fact, such votes mean little, +for the misplaced "courtesy of the Senate," under which schemers betray +the people, makes it possible for even recognized "reformers" to be +forced to vote against most desirable measures. The other fellows of the +Perkins stripe when brought to book on their "record" can always give in +defense: 'Why, your reformer, Senator So and So, did the same thing.' To +be sure, a La Follette does kick over the traces once in a while, in +which event he usually votes alone, while the solemn victims of +"courtesy" vote against him according to Senatorial custom, not to use +the more expressive word, stupidity. + +Thus, when Perkins craftily invited his opponents to attack him on his +record, they dodged the trap gingerly, all save Callan. Callan didn't +walk, he rushed into it, sending a scathing letter to Perkins on that +gentleman's Senatorial record. Perkins' reply and explanation came as a +counter blow. The fire was tempered out of Callan's letter. Callan had +permitted Perkins to select the fighting ground, and Perkins had +exhibited admirable judgment. + +The attack on Perkins had better been made on his attitude toward the +shipping interests of California - the development of the isthmian route +to New York, for example; on his attitude toward the machine, whose +strangle-hold upon the State is locked with federal patronage; on his +attitude toward the so-called "Roosevelt policies"; on his attitude +toward the Roosevelt administration, upon which he hung with the dead +weight of crafty, persistent obstruction. There were plenty of +vulnerable points in the Perkins armor, but naturally in selecting the +point of attack, Perkins carefully avoided them. So Callan's bolt +rebounded harmlessly, to the astonishment of the various well-meaning +reformers, and the intense satisfaction of the machine, whose somewhat +anxious leaders recognized full well that Callan's discomfiture would +discourage attacks from other possibly effective sources. + +The next move against Perkins came the week before the Legislature +convened. A number of anti-machine Republicans met at San Francisco to +canvass the situation, and formulate a plan to defeat Perkins if +possible. It was found that on joint Senate and Assembly ballot, the +Democrats would have twenty-nine votes and the Republicans ninety-one. +Sixty-one votes are required for the election of a Senator. The +Republicans at the meeting considered these twenty-nine votes as with +them in the selection of an anti-machine Republican for Perkins' place. +The anti-machine Republicans thus in revolt against the machine, +themselves numbered twenty Senators and Assemblymen, which made +forty-nine votes against Perkins. In addition, an even dozen Republican +Senators and Assemblymen were counted upon as willing to vote against +Perkins if his defeat could be shown to be certain. This would have +given the anti-Perkins element sixty-one votes, just enough to elect. +For one of their number to fail, meant a deadlock; for two, if +Republicans, to fail meant Perkins' election. It was a slender chance, +but the possibility of success kept the movement alive until the hour of +the Senatorial caucus. + +Those who were promoting the movement were not at the time aware that +six of the Democratic Assemblymen and one of the Democratic Senators +were governed by such high conceptions of their duties as citizens and +responsibilities as legislators, that they were to cast their votes in +the Senatorial election for a San Francisco saloon keeper, on the ground +that he is a "good fellow" and had "spent money liberally for the +party." This of itself made the defeat of Perkins impossible. + +The anti-Perkins forces were also handicapped by the fact that they had +no candidate. The machine had been craftily booming Perkins for years; +the reformers had boomed nobody[19]. They were, then, without material +for a positive fight; all they could do was negative, which is always +confession of weakness. In addition, aside from the Bulletin, there was +no San Francisco publication that could be counted upon to back their +movement. The Call was openly supporting Perkins. The movement against +Perkins, while it admittedly represented the attitude of the majority of +the electors of the State, and the feeling of a safe majority of both +Houses of the Legislature, was without one element of real strength[20]. + +Under the United States Revised Statutes, the Legislature was called +upon, to proceed on the second Tuesday after organization, to elect +Senator Perkins' successor. As the Legislature had organized on January +4, the second Tuesday fell on January 12. The call for the Republican +caucus to go through the form of selecting a candidate for the Senate, +was circulated the third and fourth days of the session. The Republican +Senators all signed it, not a few of them with the non-resistance of a +wretch in the hands of a hangman. + +More opposition developed in the Assembly. Callan and three or four +others kept up their resistance to the last, but when the caucus +assembled on Friday evening, January 8, all the Republican Senators and +Assemblymen who could do so were in attendance[21]. + +The caucus was of course hopelessly programmed for Perkins. +Nevertheless, the better element of the party endeavored to secure some +expression from Senator Perkins as to his attitude toward the Western +transportation problem. This led to a heated debate which kept the +caucus in session until a late hour. The debate turned on the celebrated +Bristow letter. + +For years, the Southern Pacific Railroad Company has been able to +prevent effective water competition by way of the Isthmus of Panama. The +Government has a line of steamers running from New York to the Isthmus, +and a railroad line across the Isthmus. With an additional line of +steamers running from San Francisco to Panama, the Government would have +a through line from San Francisco to New York. This would give genuine +competition with the Southern Pacific system, and free the State from +the grasp of the transportation monopoly. + +In August, 1907, Hon. J. L. Bristow, now United States Senator from +Kansas, was appointed a Special Panama Railroad Commissioner, to +investigate the necessity and feasibility of putting on the Pacific +line. Mr. Bristow, in a report that fairly sizzled with criticism of +Southern Pacific and Pacific Mail Steamship Company methods, recommended +that the government line be established. When Pacific freight rates were +arbitrarily raised just before the Legislature convened, shippers of the +State appealed, not to Senator Perkins or to Senator Flint, but to +Senator Bristow from interior Kansas, asking that he concern himself +with having government steamers put on the San Francisco-Panama route. +Bristow replied that he would do what he could, that he was receiving +many letters from Western shippers who favored the plan, but that the +chief difficulty in the way was the opposition of the California +delegation in the Senate. + +This Bristow letter caused all the trouble at the Perkins caucus. The +suggestion was made that Perkins owed it to the State to explain the +charges brought against him by the Senator from Kansas. A resolution was +accordingly introduced providing that a telegram be sent Senator Perkins +calling upon him to state whether the charge made by Senator Bristow +were true. + +Immediately the pro-Perkins people assumed the dignified position that +such a telegram would be an insult to the venerable Senator from +California. Nobody seems to have taken the trouble to state that the +Bristow charges were untrue, but that the requesting of the Senator to +answer them would be an insult to that dignitary was made subject of the +warmest oratory. So warm was it, that the opposition to Perkins melted +away like wax - or putty, if putty melts - until but five members of the +caucus had the courage to vote to ask Perkins to declare himself on the +transportation problem. Callan of San Francisco voted for it, so did +Drew of Fresno, so did Young of Berkeley and two others. But 77 members +of the caucus voted against the resolution. Senator Perkins was +permitted to maintain a dignified silence on the Bristow charges. After +the vote on the resolution, Assemblyman Callan left the caucus. + +But even with the Republican caucus nomination, Perkins did not receive +the entire Republican vote. In the Assembly, Callan voted for Chester +Rowell of Fresno, and Sackett for Thomas R. Bard of Ventura. Fifty-six +of the Assembly votes, however, were cast for Perkins. + +In the Senate, Perkins received thirty-two votes. The thirty regular +Republicans voted for him, as did Senator Bell, the +Independent-Republican, and Senator Caminetti, Democrat. Senator +Caminetti voted for Perkins because Caminetti regarded Perkins, as +nearly as could be determined, the choice of the electors to whom +Caminetti owed his election. Caminetti believes that the United States +Senator should be selected by the people of the State. The nearest he +could get to this was to ascertain the wishes of the people of his +district. He was convinced that the people of his district wished to see +Perkins re-elected. So, regardless of partisan considerations, Caminetti +the Democrat voted for Perkins the Republican. Caminetti's explanation +of his vote is worthy of the most careful consideration[22]. + +The regular candidate of the minority for the Democratic complimentary +vote was J. O. Davis, a gentleman of the highest character. But eight of +the Democratic members voted against him. Seven of the eight, +Assemblymen Black, Collum, Hopkins, Lightner, O'Neil and Wheelan and +Senator Hare voted for Harry P. Flannery, a San Francisco saloon-keeper; +the eighth, Senator Kennedy, voted for William H. Langdon. Six +Democratic Senators and thirteen Democratic Assemblymen voted for Mr. +Davis. They were: Senators Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Holohan, +Miller, and Sanford; Assemblymen Baxter, Gibbons, Gillis, Irwin, Johnson +of Placer, Juilliard, Maher, Mendenhall, Odom, Polsley, Preston, +Stuckenbruck and Webber. + + + +[19] It is interesting to note that when a good citizen gives effective +resistance to the machine, that the machine invariably starts the cry - +"He is a candidate for the United States Senate." The open candidacy - +and liberal advertising - of a machine man for the Federal Senatorship +causes no adverse comment. For an anti-machine man to so aspire - or the +suspicion in machine breasts that he so aspires - is heralded as +evidence of his complete unworthy and irresponsibility. + +[20] But when the machine Republicans of a State unite with Democrats to +elect a machine man to the Federal Senate, no such difficulties attend +them. Note the election by a coalition of machine Republicans and +machine Democrats in Illinois of "Billy" Lorimer, the notorious "blond +boss" of the stockyards, to the United States Senate. + +[21] Senator Bell, although a Republican, was excluded because he would +not make his peace with Walter Parker, the Southern Pacific boss of the +political district lying south of Tehachepi. See Chapter 11, +Organization of the Senate. + +[22] Caminetti's explanation of his vote, as printed in the Senate +Journal, is in full as follows: + +"Mr. President: During the campaign of 1906, in the Tenth Senatorial +District, resulting in my election as Senator, I made the question of +'The election of United States Senators by direct vote of the people' +one of the leading issues upon which I asked the suffrage of the people. +I then pledged myself in all my speeches and in the press, to endeavor +to secure the passage of a law by the Legislature in case of my election +having that object in view, and in case of failure in the effort I would +nevertheless follow that principle and vote for the choice of a majority +of the qualified electors of that district in the selection of a Senator +during my term of off cue. + +"The last session of the Legislature failed to enact the necessary +legislation on the subject, but the people of my district have +nevertheless plainly indicated to me that Hon. George C. Perkins was at +the last election, and now is, their choice for the United States +Senatorship. + +"Under these circumstances I feel in honor bound by my pledges to the +people of the Tenth Senatorial District, to record the choice of a +majority of the qualified electors thereof for Hon. George C. Perkins +for United States Senator, hoping in so doing that it will never again +be necessary for a member of the Legislature to vote the choice of the +people of his district in this, or any other, indirect way, but that +this Legislature will rise superior to partisanship and give to the +people hereafter an opportunity, under suitable laws, to vote directly +for candidates for that office. Should this Legislature fail in this +high duty to the public, I trust that the people, in whom all power +resides, will hereafter take up this matter in the way the people of the +Tenth Senatorial District did two years ago, and thus be able in all +legislative districts of the State to record their choice for the +exalted office of United States Senator." + + + +Chapter VI. + +The Anti-Racetrack Gambling Bill. + +Supporters of the Measure Knew What They Wanted, Drew a Bill to Meet the +Requirements of the Situation and Refused to Compromise with the Machine +Element - Suggestive Series of "Errors" Attended Its Passage. + + + +Of the three principal reform measures considered by the Legislature of +1909 - the Direct Primary bill, the Railroad Regulation bill and the +Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill - the last named was the only one to +become a law untrimmed of its effective features. The Anti-Racetrack +Gambling bill passed the Assembly, passed the Senate and was signed by +the Governor precisely as it had been introduced; there was not so much +as the change of a comma allowed. The result is an anti-gambling law on +California statute books which if it work as well as it has in other +States will prevent bookmaking and pool-selling, thus relieving horse +racing of the incubus which has made the sport of kings +disreputable[23]. + +Since the reform element succeeded in passing the Anti-Racetrack +Gambling bill without amendment, there is widespread opinion that there +was no opposition to its passage. As a matter of fact, nothing is +farther from the truth. Before a legislator reached Sacramento, the +pro-gambling lobby was on the ground, and continued its hold-up process +until the Assembly, by a vote of 67 to 10, passed the measure, and by a +vote of 57 to 19 refused to grant it reconsideration. + +The writer remembers his first poll of the Senate on the anti-gambling +issue, when only nineteen Senators could be safely counted for it[24]; +twenty-one were necessary for its passage. To be sure, a number of the +Senators not included in the list of the nineteen who were from the +beginning safe for the measure, were pledged to vote for an anti-pool +selling bill, but this did not necessarily mean the effective +Walker-Otis bill which had been drawn to prevent pool selling and +bookmaking. Not a few unquestionably figured on voting for a bill that +would place them on record as against racetrack gambling, but do +racetrack gambling little or no harm. + +These uncertain ones were blocked in their plan of action because the +proponents of the Anti-Gambling bill knew just what they wanted to do, +namely, close up poolrooms and bookmakers' booths. They took the most +effective way to close them up, namely, adapted to California +Constitution and criminal practice, the Hughes anti-gambling law, the +adoption of which Governor Hughes forced in New York, and which in New +York State had proved most effective. + +The bill was drawn carefully and its backers in the Legislature and out +of the Legislature let it be known that no amendment, not so much as to +change a comma, would be tolerated. The measure was introduced in the +Senate by Walker of Santa Clara, and in the Assembly by Otis of Alameda. +It was known as the Walker-Otis bill. + +This determined stand for the passage of the measure just as it had been +drawn thoroughly alarmed the gambling lobby. "Reformers" who would not +"compromise" proved a new experience. The machine never compromises +until it is whipped. Accordingly, when public opinion demanded action on +the Walker-Otis bill, the machine Senators began to talk of compromise. +In fact, up to the hour of the vote on the bill in the Senate, Senator +Wolfe did not stop whining compromise. In his speech against the passage +of the bill, just before the final vote was taken he insisted: "There +should have been a compromise measure agreed upon, a bill for which we +all could have voted." + +The moment before Wolfe had been warning the Senate that to pass the +Walker-Otis bill would tend to wreck the Republican party in California. +Just what the Walker-Otis bill had to do with Republican policies Mr. +Wolfe would no doubt have difficulty in answering. But the measure did +have much to do with machine policies. The machine had prevented the +passage of the Anti-Gambling bill two years before, and was prepared to +prevent the enactment of an effective anti-gambling law at the session +of 1909. Senator Wolfe undoubtedly fell into the common error of +mistaking the machine for the Republican party. + +However, the spirit of no compromise which gave Senator Wolfe so much +concern saved the Walker-Otis bill, and has given California an +effective law. The lesson of the incident is that if effective laws are +to be placed on the statute books, there can be no compromise with the +machine. There was compromise with the machine in the direct primary +issue, with the result that the Direct Primary law is in many respects a +sham. But that is another story to be told in another chapter. The +anti-machine element did not compromise with the machine on the +Walker-Otis bill, with the result that an effective law was passed. + + From the beginning, the anti-gambling element let it be known that no +suggestion of compromise would be entertained. They announced boldly +that if the machine succeeded in amending the measure, they, the +anti-gambling Senators and Assemblymen, would work to prevent the +passage of the amended bill. The position of these members of the +Legislature who did not propose to be sidetracked by machine trickery is +well illustrated by an interview with Senator Walker, which appeared in +the Sacramento Bee on January 19. + +"If the Hughes bill can not pass the California Legislature in the form +that it was passed in New York," said Senator Walker, "I shall vote +against the compromise or the amended bill. The people of California +have made clear their desire that an effective anti-gambling law, such +as New York enjoys, be placed on the statute books. To substitute +anything else would be betrayal."[25] + +So there was no compromise with the machine on the Walker-Otis bill, and +the people were not betrayed, as they were to be later in the passage of +the Direct Primary bill and the, Railroad Regulation bill, where there +was compromise with the machine. + +When the machine found there was to be no compromise, a curious series +of mishaps became the lot of the Walker-Otis bill, particularly in the +Senate. The measure, when introduced, was, in the ordinary course of +legislation, referred to the Senate Committee on Public Morals. But it +did not reach that committee until several days after its introduction. +When the discovery was made that it had not reached the committee, a +sensation budded but never bloomed. The facts, however, were brought out +that the measure had been reposing in the pocket of a clerk instead of +going to the committee. This "error" was corrected, and the bill turned +over to its proper custodians. + +Then came the discovery that the bill had not been properly printed; +three words had been left out of the printed bill in the State printer's +office. This "error," as soon as discovered by Senator Walker, was +corrected. It was declared to be "trivial." But the "trivial" +typographical and clerical errors in the Direct Primary bill in the +final count gave the machine its opportunity to amend the measure to +machine liking. The writer has no doubt in his own mind that the machine +aimed to delay the passage of the Walker-Otis bill until the end of the +session, as it did the Direct Primary bill, and then amend it to suit +machine purposes or defeat it altogether. + +Error even attended the recording of the passage of the bill. After a +measure has passed the Senate, its title must be read and approved, and +an order made transmitting it to the Assembly, all of which must be +recorded in the Senate journal. The printed Senate journal of February +4, however, the day the bill was passed, merely recorded the passage of +the bill. Nothing appeared about its title having been read, or that it +had been transmitted to the Assembly. Walker discovered this "error," +and a hasty inspection of the original minutes followed. The original +minutes contained the proper record as follows: "Title read and +approved. Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly." But the two +sentences had been omitted from the printed journal. The patient Walker +had the correction made. None of these irregularities, however, resulted +in serious delay. Those behind the measure watched their opponents +closely, refused utterly to treat them with the "courtesy due Senators," +in fact, acted under the assumption that the gambling element would stop +at nothing to defeat the bill. This watchfulness is an important +although comparatively minor reason why the bill was passed. + +Then came the machine's move to pass "an anti gambling bill" as a +substitute for the Walker-Otis measure. Martinelli in the Senate and +Butler in the Assembly had introduced an Anti-Pool Selling, Anti-Book +Making bill. The measure had much to commend it but was by no means so +effective as the Walker-Otis bill. As a last straw, the gambling element +grasped at the Martinelli-Butler bill, and threw their influence on the +side of its passage. But here they again met with the uncompromising +resistance of the reform element. There was nothing left for the machine +to do but make its fight on the floor of Senate and of Assembly. And the +fight came on in a way and with a suddenness which brought consternation +upon the machine forces. + + + +[23] The Walker-Otis bill is in full as follows: + +Section 1. A new section is hereby added to the Penal Code to be known +as Section three hundred and thirty-seven a thereof and to read as +follows: + +aye. Every person, who engages in pool selling or bookmaking at any time +or place; or who keeps or occupies any room, shed, tenement, tent, +booth, or building, float or vessel, or any part thereof, or who +occupies any place or stand of any kind, upon any public or private +grounds within this State, with books, papers, apparatus or +paraphernalia, for the purpose of recording or registering bets or +wagers, or of selling pools, or who records or registers bets or wagers, +or sells pools, upon the result of any trial or contest of skill, speed +or power of endurance, of man or beast or between men or beasts, or upon +the result of any lot, chance, casualty, unknown or contingent event +whatsoever; or who receives, registers, records or forwards, or purports +or pretends to receive, register, record or forward, in any manner +whatsoever, any money, thing or consideration of value, bet or wagered, +or offered for the purpose of being bet or wagered, by or for any other +person, or sells pools, upon any such result; or who, being the owner, +lessee, or occupant of any room, shed, tenement, tent, booth or +building, float or vessel, or part thereof, or of any grounds within +this State, knowingly permits the same to be used or occupied for any of +these purposes, or therein keeps, exhibits or employs any device or +apparatus for the purpose of recording or registering such bets or +wagers, or the selling of such pools, or becomes the custodian or +depositary for gain, hire or reward of any money, property or thing of +value, staked, wagered or pledged, or to be wagered or pledged upon any +such result; or who aids, assists or abets in any manner in any of the +said acts, which are hereby forbidden, is punishable by imprisonment in +a county jail or State prison for a period of not less than thirty days +and not exceeding one year. + +[24] Had not the people of the Twenty-ninth and Thirty-first Senatorial +Districts revolted against the machine at the general election of 1908, +the Walker-Otis bill would probably have been defeated in the Senate. In +the chapter dealing with the passage of the Miller-Drew Reciprocal +Demurrage bill, it will be shown how the Democratic Senators Holohan and +Campbell were elected in the Republican Twenty-ninth and Thirty-first +Senatorial Districts, not because they were Democrats, but because the +Republicans of those districts, recognizing the real issue before the +State - the machine against the anti-machine element - voted for Holohan +and Campbell, knowing them to be for good government and a "square deal" +for all. Holohan and Campbell were from the beginning foremost in their +support of the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. To be sure, at the final +vote, only seven Senators voted against the measure. But it is generally +conceded that when the session opened, the gamblers had nineteen +Senators who could have been prevailed upon to vote against an effective +anti-gambling bill. Had machine men sat in the seats occupied by Holohan +and Campbell, the gamblers would have had twenty-one votes in the +Senate, and the Walker-Otis bill would have been defeated. + +[25] Much of the credit for this determined stand is due Earl H. Webb, +president of the Anti-Racetrack Gambling League, who managed the fight +for effective anti-racetrack gambling legislation not only during the +session of the Legislature, but before the Legislature convened. Mr. +Webb first convinced himself that the Walker-Otis bill would stop pool +selling and bookmaking; and that the measure would stand the test of +honest interpretation by the courts. Then he made his fight for it. To +Mr. Webb, more than to any other one person, is due the credit for its +passage. + + + +Chapter VII. + +Passage of the Walker-Otis Bill. + +Anti-Machine Element Forced the Issue and Compelled Early Action on the +Measure - Evidence That Machine Planned to Defeat or Amend the Bill by +Delaying Its Passage Until Toward the End of the Session. + + + +As one looks back over the exciting first five weeks of the session, +when the Walker-Otis bill was under consideration, it is plain that the +machine would have preferred to have made its initial fight in the +Senate. If defeated in the Senate, the enemies of the measure could have +jockeyed for delay, prevented the passage of the measure until the +closing hours of the session, and then killed it or forced its +supporters to accept amendments. + +But the initial fight did not come in the Senate. The Assembly was the +battle-ground. The reason for this lies principally in the fact that +while Assemblyman W. B. Griffiths, of Napa, raises fast horses, he is not +a gambler, and is as much opposed to the bookmaking, pool-selling +features of the track as Senator Walker himself. Griffiths was made +chairman of the Assembly Committee on Public Morals. While this +committee has sundry sins to answer for, nevertheless it made an +astonishingly clean record on the Walker-Otis bill. On January 18, less +than three weeks after the Legislature had assembled, Chairman Griffiths +called his committee together to take up the Walker-Otis bill. + +Of the nine members of the committee, seven were present, Mott and +Mendenhall alone failing to answer to their names. Those present were: +Griffiths, Cattell, Young, Dean, Perine, Fleisher and Wilson. The seven +members went through the bill paragraph by paragraph and decided +unanimously to recommend it for passage. + +Had a dynamite bomb been set off under the Emeryville gambling +establishment, greater consternation could scarcely have seized upon the +pro-gambling element. The gamblers realized that the committee's prompt +action threatened the machine's plan to delay action on the measure +until the closing days of the session. For the moment all interest +centered in Mott and Mendenhall, the two members of the committee who +had been absent when the measure had been considered. Twenty-four hours +developed the fact that Mendenhall sanctioned the action of his seven +associates. This made eight of the nine committeemen for the bill. But +the ninth member, Assemblyman Mott of Alameda County, was very much +offended at what the committee had done. + +Assemblyman Mott was elected as a Lincoln-Roosevelt League member. +Probably the Lincoln-Roosevelt League does not like to be reminded of +that unfortunate fact. But the lesson of Mr. Mott is so necessary for +the Lincoln-Roosevelt League and all other reform movements that the +conspicuous part which Mott played against reform policies cannot be too +much insisted upon. To be sure, Mr. Mott voted for the bill when it was +up for passage - the Lincoln-Roosevelt Republican platform of his county +pledged him to it. But there is a deal of difference between supporting +a measure and voting for it[26]. + +Mott was very much offended at what the committee had done and demanded +that another meeting be held. Such a meeting, to accommodate Mr. Mott, +was held - held in the office of Speaker Phil Stanton; held behind +closed doors; held with Jerk Burke, Southern Pacific lobbyist, safely +entrenched across the hall from Speaker Stanton's office in the back +office of Sergeant-at-Arms Stafford[27]. + +But Mott failed to change the position of his eight associates. The +further consideration of the measure by the committee which he demanded +was denied. He accordingly took the fight for reconsideration to the +floor of the Assembly. The fact that eight of the committee were against +him, apparently had no weight at all with Mr. Mott. + +Failing to force the committee to reconsider its action in recommending +that the bill pass, Mott told his troubles to the Assembly. In the +Assembly Mott moved that the measure be re-referred to the Committee on +Public Morals, eight members of which had joined in recommending that it +"do pass." + +The motion was lost by a vote of 53 to 23. This was recognized as the +test vote in the Assembly on the Anti Racetrack Gambling bill. That the +opponents of the bill failed to make a better showing fairly paralyzed +the pro-gambling lobby. Mott, chagrined and discomfited, retired in +confusion[28]. + +Assemblyman Gibbons managed at this point to tie the bill up for another +day, by giving notice that on the day following, he would move that the +vote by which the bill was refused reference to the Committee on Public +Morals be reconsidered. The day following Mr. Gibbons made his motion +but was voted down, thirty Assemblymen supporting and forty-eight +opposing him[29]. + +The Gibbons motion having been disposed of, Assemblyman Butler moved to +amend the measure, by substituting for it the Martinelli-Butler bill. +But again did the anti-gambling element force the issue. The motion was +lost by a vote of 23 to 52. + +Other proposed amendments having been voted down, Mr. Otis moved that +the bill be put on its passage the next day, January 21. This was a +final blow at the machine's purpose to delay the passage of the bill as +long as possible, and was met with determined opposition. But the motion +prevailed by a vote of 44 to 32. + +The bill was on the following day put upon its final passage. The writer +considers the real test vote on the bill was cast on Mott's motion to +refer the measure back to the Committee on Public Morals. The vote on +the passage of the measure counts for little under the circumstances. +Sixty-seven Assemblymen voted for it; only ten - and every one of them +from San Francisco - voted against it. + +By consulting the table showing the six votes on this bill - Table "D" +of the appendix - it will be seen that eleven of the twenty-three +Assemblymen who voted for Mott's motion to refer the measure back to the +Committee on Public Morals voted for its final passage. Two, Baxter and +Schmitt, who had voted for the Mott resolution, were absent when the +final vote on the bill was taken, leaving only ten who had voted for the +Mott resolution to vote against the bill. The eleven who had voted for +Mott's motion, but who switched to safety when the vote on the bill's +passage came, were: Beardslee, Greer, Johnson of Sacramento[30], Johnson +of San Diego, Johnston of Contra Costa, Moore, Mott, Nelson, Odom, +Wagner, Webber - 11. + +There was just one more parliamentary move by which the Walker-Otis bill +could be delayed in the Assembly, to give notice of a motion to +reconsider the vote by which the measure had been passed. Grove L. +Johnson came to the rescue with the notice. This tied the bill up for +another twenty-four hours. On the 2nd Johnson made his motion to +reconsider but was defeated by a vote of nineteen to fifty-seven. + +The table of the six votes on the Walker-Otis bill shows at a glance who +voted consistently for the measure on all of the numerous roll calls; +who voted consistently against it; and who were pulled backward and +forward, voting one moment to satisfy the public demand that the bill be +passed, and the next on the side of the gambling interests[31]. + +Public opinion was running high for the passage of the Walker-Otis bill +by the time the measure reached the Senate, after passing the Assembly, +but the bill might still have been held up in the Senate committee[32] +had it not been for the ridiculous attack which Tom Williams, president +of the California jockey Club, made upon all who supported the measure, +or all who Williams thought supported it. + +The occasion was a public hearing before the Senate Committee on Public +Morals, at which Williams was asked to present the side of the opponents +of the bill. The crowd that filled the Senate chamber expected from +Williams some reasons why the measure should be denied passage, but it +was disappointed. + +Instead of giving reasons in support of his position, Williams +introduced the methods of the barroom into the Senate chamber. He +dramatically gave Rev. Frank K. Baker, of Sacramento, the lie, under +conditions which stamped Williams as a bully and a coward. His +uncalled-for attack on Dr. Baker would have killed his argument, but not +content with this, he made probably the most astounding attack on the +Protestant clergy of the country ever heard in California, certainly the +most astonishing ever heard in the Senate chamber of the State[33]. + +The racetrack man's tirade did not give the reasons for continuance of +gambling, which the people expected to hear from him. Finally, when +Williams was swamped by questions which his insolence and tactlessness +had provoked, Senator Frank Leavitt came to his rescue by moving +adjournment. Leavitt's motion prevailed, but not until Williams had +effectively settled the fate of the Walker-Otis bill. + +The Committee on Public Morals reported the bill back the next day with +the recommendation that it do not pass. The recommendation was that of +Weed, Wolfe and Leavitt. While Kennedy and Savage failed to vote for the +recommendation, they made no minority report. But even with the +unfavorable report, the measure passed the Senate by a vote of 33 to 7. +In the eleventh hour, uncertain Senators like Welch joined the winning +side, but the showing made by the gamblers was, all things considered, +better than could have been expected[34]. + +In the Senate and Assembly, out of a total vote of 120, the gambling +element, which had year after year succeeded in preventing the passage +of an anti-racetrack gambling bill, commanded on the measure's final +passage but seventeen votes. The incident illustrates what aroused +public opinion, when it finds expression in a definite plan of action, +can compel. + +But even with the measure's final passage, the delays that attended it +continued. It passed the Senate on Thursday, February 4. By the +following Saturday, the measure had been correctly engrossed, but could +not go to the Governor until it had received the signature of Speaker +Stanton of the Assembly. Stanton was out of town. As a result, it was +February 10, six days after it had passed the Senate, before it went to +the Governor. Governor Gillett took nine days to sign it, the Senate +History showing that it was approved on February 19. Because of the +delays the gamblers were enabled to complete their season at the +Emeryville track. + + + +[26] Of the six votes taken in the Assembly on the Walker-Otis bill +issue, Mott in effect voted four times against the immediate passage of +the measure. See Table "D." + +[27] It was Jerk Burke's first appearance at the capital for the +session. The danger which threatened the gambling element brought to the +capital every machine lobbyist within reach, from Frank Daroux down. It +was an anxious hour for the machine. + +[28] This first test vote in the Assembly on the Walker-Otis bill was as +follows: + +For Mott's motion, and in effect against the bill: Baxter, Beardslee, +Beban, Black, Coghlan, Collum, Cullen, Greer, Hopkins, Johnson of +Sacramento (Grove L.), Johnson of San Diego, Johnston of Contra Costa, +Macauley, McManus, Moore, Mott, Nelson, Odom, O'Neil, Pugh, Schmitt, +Wagner, Webber. - 23. + +Against Mott's motion, and in effect for the bill: Barndollar, Bratty, +Bohnett, Butler, Callan, Cattell, Collier, Costar, Cronin, Dean, Drew, +Flavelle, Fleisher, Flint, Gerdes, Gibbons, Gillis, Griffiths, Hammon, +Hanlon, Hans. Hawk, Hayes, Hewitt, Hinkle, Holmquist, Irwin, Johnson of +Placer, Juilliard, Kiwi, Leeds, Lightner, Maher, McClellan, Melrose, +Mendenhall, Otis, Perine, Polsley, Preston, Pulcifer, Rech, Rutherford, +Sackett, Silver, Stanton, Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Transue, Whitney, +Wilson, Wylie, Young - 53. + +[29] The several votes taken on the Walker-Otis bill will be found In +the table "D" of the appendix. + +[30] Johnson of Sacramento voted for the bill to give notice that he +would the next day move for its reconsideration. Reconsideration can be +secured only by a member voting with the majority. Had Johnson voted +against the bill he could not have secured its reconsideration. + +[31] Attention is called to the vote on reconsideration of Assemblyman +Feeley, of Alameda, another Lincoln-Roosevelt member Mr. Feeley was +absent when the vote on Mott's motion was taken. But Mr. Feeley voted +for the bill when it was on final passage, thus keeping his record +straight. But Mr. Feeley hastened to vote for reconsideration of the +measure. + +Mr. Feeley, like Mr. Mott, was nominated by the Lincoln-Roosevelt League +because he could be elected. Mr. Feeley furnishes another example of the +folly of which reformers are sometimes guilty, of nominating men whose +best recommendation seems to be that they can be elected. To be elected +is very important, to be sure; but if a man when elected to the +Legislature is to vote against reform policies, why should the +anti-machine element nominate him, thereby losing all the chance they, +might have had of electing a man who would be in sympathy with their +endeavors? + +[32] In 1907, a measure similar to the Walker-Otis bill was killed in +this way. It passed the Assembly and was in the Senate referred to the +Senate Committee on Public Morals. The committee refused to report it +back to the Senate, and friends of the measure could not secure enough +votes on the floor of the Senate to compel the committee to act. The +committee (1907) consisted of Senators Irish, Leavitt, Lynch, Wolfe and +Kennedy. Irish and Lynch did not sit in the Senate of 1909, and could +not be reappointed to the committee. But Lieutenant- Governor Porter +distinguished himself by reappointing to the committee Wolfe, Leavitt +and Kennedy. Weed and Savage were added to take the places left vacant +by Irish and Lynch. Weed in 1907 voted with Leavitt, Wolfe and Kennedy +against compelling the committee to release the Anti-Racetrack Gambling +bill. Senator Savage (1907) voted for the bill's release, but Senator +Savage at the opening of the session of 1909, was at least counted as +opposed to the Walker-Otis bill. The gambling element had no complaint +to make of the Committee on Public Morals which Lieutenant- Governor +Porter had appointed. + +[33] Williams was not the only gambler who injured the gamblers' cause +that night. Frank Daroux, keeper of the notorious Sausalito poolrooms, +interrupted A. J. Treat, of Sausalito, who was speaking for the +Walker-Otis bill, to demand of him how it is that at the polls the +gamblers of that city invariably defeat the anti-gambling element. + +"You will remember, Mr. Daroux," came back Treat, "that at the last +general election you and I discussed that question?" + +"Yes," was the reply. + +"And I asked you why you were in politics?" continued Treat. + +"Yes," said Daroux. + +"And you told me," insisted Treat, "that you were in politics for +principle." + +"Yes," admitted the pool seller. + +"And I asked you how you spelt it then; and I ask you how you spell it +now?" + +The crowd that packed the Senate Chamber, even the scores of racetrack +touts that had been rushed to Sacramento to give weight to the side of +the gamblers, went wild at this. Treat was cheered to the echo. Daroux +slunk back into his seat silenced and was not heard from again the whole +evening. + +[34] The vote was as follows: + +For the bill: Anthony, Bates, Bell, Bills, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, +Burnett, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, Estudillo, +Holohan, Hurd, Kennedy, Lewis, Martinelli, McCartney, Miller, Price, +Roseberry, Rush, Sanford, Savage, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker, +Welch, Willis, Wright - 33. + +Against the bill: Finn, Hare, Hartman, Leavitt, Reily, Weed, Wolfe - 7. + + + +Chapter VIII. + +The Direct Primary Bill. + +Parallel Between It and the Walker-Otis Bill - Attempt to Placate the +Machine Weakened Position of Its Supporters - Most Serious Criticism +Came from Advocates of the Direct Primary Idea - What the Original +Measure Provided - Machine's Plan of Campaign. + + + +The parallel between the Walker-Otis Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill and +the Wright-Stanton Direct Primary bill furnishes the most suggestive +feature of the Legislative session. Each was based on a demand of a +large majority of the people of the State for the correction of an +abuse; the one to prevent the prostitution of the race-course in the +interest of the gambling element; the second to prevent the domination +in public affairs of the corrupt, corporation-backed political boss. + +Each had been discussed in the public prints for months previous to the +convening of the Legislature, and each had been made in the popular view +of affairs a sort of test by which the Legislature was to be judged. + +Each had the support of not only the better element of electors, but the +better element of each House of the Legislature. Each had the determined +secret opposition, and so far as it dared, the open opposition of the +machine. + +The campaign which the machine planned against the bills was practically +the same in each instance - to amend the measures into a condition of +ineffectiveness, and then pass them as sop to The People. This would +have given The People a Direct Primary law without a direct primary; an +Anti-Gambling law that would neither close poolrooms nor interfere with +bookmaking. + +And here the parallel ends. + +The proponents of the Anti-Gambling bill introduced an Anti-Gambling +measure, showed that it was the best that could be drawn, and let it be +known that they (the supporters of the measure) would, if it were +amended by the machine, vote against it. + +The proponents of the Direct Primary bill, on the other hand, seemed +possessed of the notion that they must placate the machine if any Direct +Primary bill were to be passed. + +The backers of the Anti-Gambling bill treated the machine leaders as +recognized enemies of the measure, with whom there could be no +compromise. The backers of the Direct Primary bill treated the machine +leaders as friends and allies, inviting them to offer suggestion and +advice. + +The results of the two campaigns speak for the effectiveness of the two +methods. The Anti-Gambling element put through an effective +Anti-Gambling bill, refusing to compromise on so much as the change of a +comma. But in the case of the Direct Primary bill, the machine not only +had the last word, but in the feature of the nomination of United States +Senators, the real bone of contention, amended the measure very much to +its liking. + +Long before the Legislature convened it was common talk at San Francisco +that the backers of the Direct Primary bill were willing to accept any +sort of a bill, so long as a direct primary measure be passed. Inasmuch +as it is quite possible that a legislative enactment called Direct +Primary law may be a trifle worse than no Direct Primary law at all, the +jelly-fish attitude of the leaders in the movement caused no little +unfavorable comment. + +It did not seem to occur to the self-constituted leaders that their +proper course was to draw up the most effective measure possible, let +its effectiveness be known to the people - as was done in the case of +the Anti-Gambling bill - and insist that the Legislature go on record +for or against it. + +Instead, they endeavored to satisfy everybody, apparently attempted to +come to a compromise understanding with the machine, or at least to +please machine leaders. Their theory seemed to be that if the measure +were not made too effective, the machine would not seriously oppose its +passage, thus insuring a glorious and at the same time, easy victory. + +However unwarranted this assumption from appearances may be, such +hidebound machine men as Wolfe and Leavitt were consulted and flattered, +apparently with the idea that although they had been abused like +pickpockets on previous occasions, they could be won over to the Direct +Primary cause. + +The stupidity of this policy was shown at the end of the session, when +Wolfe and Leavitt dictated the terms under which the Direct Primary bill +should pass. Had the supporters of the Anti-Gambling bill pursued the +same policy, and treated the machine leaders as possible friends instead +of recognized enemies, Wolfe, Leavitt and the other machine leaders +would unquestionably have dictated the provisions of the Anti-Gambling +bill, and have forced that compromise which Wolfe in his speech on the +Walker-Otis bill regretted so bitterly had not been made. + +The purpose of the Direct Primary is primarily to take away from the +political bosses the monopoly which the convention system gives them in +naming candidates for office, and to place such nomination in the hands +of The People. To this end, under the Direct Primary laws that have of +recent years been adopted, the boss-controlled convention is done away +with, and the candidate for office nominated by the direct vote of The +People. + +The play of the machine was to make the direct nomination difficult and +impracticable and, if possible, entirely ineffective. The real +supporters of the Direct Primary idea aimed to make the nomination as +simple as possible, and easily attained, that genuine expression of the +choice of the electors could be secured. + +But instead of aiming at simplicity and direct methods, the Direct +Primary bill, introduced in the Senate by Wright and in the Assembly by +Stanton[35], threw a confusing mass of partisan detail about the +selection of the primary candidate. It was made practically impossible +for an independent citizen believing in the principles of a given party, +but withholding his right to exercise the citizen's judgment at the +polls, to become a primary candidate. Throughout, the measure made it +smooth sailing for the mere partisan and extremely hard for independent +Republican or independent Democrat to secure party nomination[35a]. + +For example, the candidate for party nomination, was, according to the +terms of the bill, required not only to set forth the name of the party +under which he might seek nomination, but to make affidavit "that he +affiliated with said party at the last preceding general election, and +either that he did not vote thereat, or voted for a majority of the +candidates of said party at said next preceding general election, and +intends to so vote at the ensuing election." + +Thus, no citizen who had not supported the majority of his party +candidates at the previous election, and who was unwilling to take an +oath before their nomination, to support a majority of the candidates at +the next ensuing election, was to be eligible for primary nomination to +office. + +But this, and similar unfortunate provisions were practically lost sight +of in the fight made over the provisions for the nomination of United +States Senators, and remained in the measure as it was finally enacted +into law. + +It may be, as the machine element contends, that provision for the +nomination of United States Senators has no place in a Direct Primary +law, but the fact remains that The People have inseparably linked with +the direct primary idea the selection of United States Senators by +direct vote. + +The Federal laws provide that United States Senators shall be elected by +the Legislature. But in States where Direct Primary laws have been +adopted, provisions have been made by which the names of candidates for +the United States Senate are placed on the primary ballot the same as +the name of any other candidate for a State office. The same Direct +Primary laws give candidates for the Legislature opportunity to pledge +themselves to accept The People's decision, and as members of the +Legislature to cast their votes for such candidate for the United States +Senate as The People may have named. + +The Legislature is thus made to abide by The People's will in electing +United States Senators, precisely as the Electoral College is made to +abide by The People's will in the election of the President. + +To be sure, no candidate for the Legislature need take the pledge if he +does not care to do so, but it is recognized that where it is possible +for the voter to express a choice for United States Senator, the +legislative candidate who fails to pledge himself to respect The +People's choice would stand slim chances of election. + +The Direct Primary law adopted by Oregon[35b] represents the highest +development of the plan for popular selection of United States Senators. +In that State the candidate for the United States Senate is nominated +the same as any other candidate, the names of each successful primary +nominee going on the regular ballot the same as that of any candidate +for State office. + +The Senatorial candidate who receives the highest number of votes is +not, of course, elected to the United States Senate, but candidates to +the Legislature are given opportunity to pledge themselves to respect +the wishes of the voters and elect to the Senate the candidate who is +thus endorsed. The Legislative candidate may sign such a pledge, or he +may sign a statement that he will regard the popular vote for United +States Senator as merely advisory and not binding. + +But it is noticeable that in Oregon and other States where such +wholesome direct primary measures have become laws the legislative +candidate signs the pledge to abide by the mandate of the electors. + +Unquestionably The People of California expected some such provision in +the California Direct Primary law. Unfortunately, however, Senator +Wright, who had charge of the bill, is not at all in sympathy with the +Oregon plan. It is claimed that the framers of the bill were as little +in sympathy with the Oregon plan as Senator Wright himself. At any rate, +the bill, as a sort of compromise, gave the electors opportunity to +express their choice for United States Senator within party lines. The +candidate for the Legislature was to be given opportunity to pledge +himself to abide, not by the selection of the electors of the State, but +by the selection of the electors of his party[36]. + +The name of a candidate for the United States Senate did not, under the +original Wright-Stanton bill, go on the final ticket. His choice was +confined to the primaries and was at best to be regarded only by the +legislators of his own political faith. The People of California were +not to be given a direct vote in the selection of United States +Senators, as are The People of Oregon. + +If the framers of the Wright-Stanton Primary bill thought that their +compromise on the United States Senator feature of the measure would +placate the machine, they were much disappointed. The machine fought the +arrangement for popular selection of United States Senators within party +lines as positively as it would have combated the Oregon plan itself. + +Under either plan, the machine recognized there was always danger that +the selection of a United States Senator would actually be made by The +People. This would mean loss to the machine of Federal patronage, and +Federal patronage is the sure rock upon which the machine in California +is founded. Indeed, had either plan been incorporated into law, the +re-election of Senator Frank Flint would have been made practically +impossible. So the machine fought the Wright-Stanton plan as stubbornly +as it would have opposed the Oregon plan. + +On the other hand, the best supporters of the Direct Primary idea were +much disappointed that the Oregon plan had not been incorporated into +the bill. Not a few of them grew lukewarm in their support of the +measure. The extreme partisanship of its provisions and the failure to +provide for popular selection of United States Senators hurt the measure +with its friends, and failed to placate its enemies. From the beginning +the most effective arguments against the bill were found in the bill +itself. + +This was demonstrated at the public hearing, held January 26th, to +consider the various provisions of the measure. The principal speakers +were Hiram Johnson and Judge John F. Davis. + +Mr. Johnson dealt with the Direct Primary in a general way. He spoke of +it in its relation to practical politics, showing that an effective +Direct Primary would place this Government of ours back into the hands +of The People. That is what was wanted. Every point Johnson made was +received with applause from the crowd that packed the Senate Chamber. +And when Johnson concluded with an appeal for "a Direct Primary law that +shall be a Direct Primary law in substance and not in form alone," he +was cheered to the echo. + +Judge Davis was not so fortunate in his text as was Mr. Johnson. Davis +was there to discuss the details of the bill. He had scarcely begun +before he found himself between a cross fire of questions from those on +the one side who wanted an effective measure passed and on the other +from those who wanted no Direct Primary at all. The opponents of the +Direct Primary scored few points; the believers in the measure did. + +To save himself from a ridiculous position, Davis had to evade the +question whether he would rather see an able and effective Democrat +elected to the United States Senate than a vicious and corrupt +Republican. He failed as miserably in attempting to justify the extreme +partisan features of the bill. And the questions which Judge Davis could +not answer came from men who wanted to see an effective Direct Primary +measure enacted, not from the opponents of the Direct Primary theory. + +Of course this dissatisfaction of the advocates of an effective law +encouraged the machine to action. The measure was deliberately left with +the Committee on Election Laws. The Anti-Gambling bill had passed both +Houses by February 4th, one month after the session had opened. But on +that date, the Committee had just begun consideration of the measure. To +be sure, the Election Laws Committee had been stacked against the Direct +Primary bill, but the Public Morals Committee had been stacked against +the Anti-Gambling bill as well. But the opponents of racetrack gambling +were satisfied with the Walker-Otis bill, while the proponents of the +Direct Primary for California were by no means satisfied with the +Wright-Stanton bill. + +So the machine dared do with the Direct Primary bill what it did not +dare do with the Anti-Gambling bill. The Walker-Otis bill had a standing +which the Wright-Stanton bill did not have. + +That the Committee on Election Laws did not act early in the session on +the Direct Primary bill was not because of the purpose of Senator +Estudillo, Chairman of the Committee. Time after time did Estudillo call +meetings for consideration of the bill, and repeatedly, he found only +himself, and Senators Stetson and Wright in attendance. Finally, in +February, Senator Estudillo succeeded in getting his committee together +for consideration of the all-important measure. + +That the machine proposed to make the bill inoperative was recognized +from the moment the committee was called to order. The manner in which +this was to be done developed as rapidly. The machine's plan was as +follows: + +(1) As to candidates: + +The machine proposed to amend the bill so that either a majority or a +high plurality vote should be required to nominate candidates at the +primary election. In the event of no candidate for a given office +receiving a majority or the required plurality, the nomination was to be +made by a nominating convention as under the old convention system. With +such a provision it would have been easy for the machine to introduce a +large number of candidates at the primaries, thus making it +impracticable for any one of them to receive a majority or even a high +plurality vote. This would have thrown nominations into a convention. +Thus, while the State would have had a Direct Primary law, it would have +been practically impossible to nominate a candidate under its +provisions. + +(2) As to United States Senators: + +To deny The People a voice in the election of United States Senators, +the machine had two plans: + +(A) To cut all provisions for the election of United States Senators out +of the bill. + +(B) Failing in this, to amend the bill so that candidates for the +Legislature would be required to regard the choice of the electors of +their several districts as advisory. The vote was in no way to be held +binding, nor was a legislative candidate to be required to sign a pledge +to regard in any way the wishes of the electors. Under this arrangement +there could be as high as 100 candidates for the United States Senate +endorsed at a single election - eighty from Assembly, twenty from +Senatorial districts. The effect would be, of course, the endorsement of +at least several candidates, with the result that the Legislature would +in the end be left to choose as under the present system. Thus, while +the State would have a law which apparently gave The People a voice in +the naming of Federal Senators, there would be no change whatever in the +manner in which the Federal Senators were nominated and elected. + + + +[35] In addition to the Wright-Stanton bill, Senator Roseberry +introduced a measure providing for a postal primary. In the appendix +will be found Senator Roseberry's views on the postal primary plan. + +[35a] The writer has been reliably informed that this concession was made +to the machine before a member of the Legislature reached Sacramento. + +[35b] Senator Caminetti introduced a separate bill providing the Oregon +plan for the popular choice of United States Senators. He was requested +not to press its passage BECAUSE IT MIGHT INJURE THE CHANCES OF PASSAGE +OF THE DIRECT PRIMARY BILL. The machine claquers is never at a loss for +an excuse for the defeat of a meritorious measure. + +[36] The original Wright-Stanton bill provided two pledges, which the +candidate for the Legislature was given opportunity to sign. The first +pledge bound him to abide by the choice of the electors of his party for +United States Senator. It read as follows: + +"I further declare to The People of California and to The People of the +.......... (Senatorial or Assembly) District that during my term of +office, without regard to my individual preference, I will always vote +for that candidate for United States Senator in Congress who shall have +received for that office the highest number of votes cast by my party at +the September primary election next preceding the election of a Senator +in Congress." + +If the legislative candidate did not care to sign this pledge, he was +given the alternative of signing the following: + +"I further declare to The People of California and to The People of the +... (Senatorial or Assembly) District that during my term of office I shall +consider the vote of The People at any primary election for United +States Senator as nothing more than a recommendation, which I shall be +at liberty wholly to disregard, if I see fit." + + + +Chapter IX. + +Machine Defeated in the Senate. + +Reform Forces, Regardless of Party, Unite to Secure the Passage of an +Effective Direct Primary Law-Agree on a Compromise Measure and Succeed +in Forcing It Through the Senate - Machine Badly Beaten. + + + +Senator Leroy A. Wright of San Diego introduced the Direct Primary bill +in the Senate on January 17th, and during the month that it slumbered in +the Senate Committee on Election Laws there was no reason to believe +that Senator Wright was not in sympathy with the provisions of the +measure. On February 1st, however, Senator Wright made the astonishing +confession before the Committee on Election Laws that he was not in +sympathy with that provision of his bill which gave legislative +candidates opportunity to pledge themselves to abide by the choice of +the electors of the State for United States Senator. From that moment +began Senator Wright's fight against his own bill, which finally landed +him in the camp of Leavitt, Wolfe and the other machine Senators. + +At the meeting of the Senate Committee on Election Laws, held February +1st, the solid six on the Committee, Leavitt, Wolfe, Savage, Hartman, +Kennedy and Hare, had voted two amendments into the bill which rendered +it absolutely useless for practical purposes. + +The first amendment provided that a majority instead of a plurality vote +should nominate, a provision as unconstitutional as impracticable. The +second amendment cut out of the measure all provision for popular vote +for United States Senators. + +This decided action on the part of the machine had brought consternation +upon Estudillo and Stetson who wanted to see an effective measure +passed. Wright in this crisis took the floor to state his position. + +"For my part," said Wright, "I would never sign a pledge to vote for the +candidate for United States Senator in Congress who shall have received +for that office the highest number of votes cast by my party. I do +believe, however, that the people of this State demand a partisan Direct +Primary law. But I think that the people of Oregon recognize that they +have made a mistake in going so far as they have. Under the pledge +required of candidates for the Legislature in the measure before us (the +Wright bill) a member of the Legislature might find himself compelled to +vote for a candidate whom the voters of his district opposed. I opposed +this provision when the bill was drawn, but my objection was overruled. +I now stand for the bill as it has been introduced." + +Wolfe, Leavitt and the rest of the machine Senators grinned exultantly +as Wright stated that he did not approve the provisions of his own bill. +But the faces of Estudillo and of Stetson, who had been looking upon +Wright as their leader in the pro-primary fight, fell. To employ the +famous expression of Speaker Stanton of the Assembly, they felt the +ground slipping from under their feet. There was a sensation of farther +slipping, when Wright, author of the measure, pro-primary leader and +Call-heralded reformer, offered an amendment as substitute for popular +State-wide choice for United States Senator, by making the vote for +United States Senator advisory only[37]. + +The grin of satisfaction on the faces of the machine Senators broadened +as Wright read his amendment while the faces of Estudillo and Stetson +grew blanker. But the machine Senators were in no hurry. Things were +coming their way; there was no reason for them to rush matters. So they +lazily took twenty-four hours to think it over. Then they bluntly +rejected Wright's compromise, the solid six, Wolfe, Leavitt, Savage, +Hartman, Kennedy and Hare voting against its acceptance. + +Estudillo and Stetson voted to accept the compromise. They explained +their votes. Their explanations showed their earnestness in working for +the best Direct Primary measure that could be passed - which indicates +what might have been done under other leadership - and a loyalty to +Wright, the accepted leader in the Direct Primary fight, which, to say +the least, was misplaced. + +"With this amendment," said Senator Stetson, in explaining his vote, +"the bill is not one-half so strong as it was before. I do not like it. +But I must train with one side or with the other, and for that reason +shall vote for Senator Wright's substitute." + +Senator Estudillo stated that he voted for the amendment against his +better judgment. + +"I don't believe in your amendment, Senator Wright," said Estudillo, +turning to that gentleman. "I don't think it amounts to anything. I vote +with you against my better judgment. I do not believe that this +amendment will give The People what they want - an opportunity to vote +directly for candidates for the United States Senate. My opinion is that +we should pass a good bill or no bill at all. I shall, however, yield to +Senator Wright, who is the recognized leader in this Direct Primary +fight, and vote for his amendment." + +And then the six machine members rejected the amendment. + +There wasn't much left of the Direct Primary bill. The measure was, on +February 16th, two weeks after the application of the committee's +pruning knife, reported back to the Senate with all reference to +election of United States Senators stricken from it, and the +unconstitutional and impracticable majority vote required for the +nomination of candidates for office, instead of the constitutional and +practical plurality vote, as originally provided in the bill. + +The fact should not be lost sight of that the two Senators on the +Committee on Election Laws who led the fight against the Direct Primary +bill, Leavitt and Wolfe, in the Committee on Public Morals led the fight +against the Anti-Gambling bill. Nor should it be forgotten that two of +their most docile followers in the Committee on Election Laws, Kennedy +and Hare, are "Democrats." There was no partisanship shown in the ranks +of the opponents of the Direct Primary bill; machine Democrats and +machine Republicans united for its defeat. But when anti-machine +Republican and anti-machine Democrats united for its passage, Wolfe and +Leavitt were shocked beyond measure. + +Machine Senators denounced the anti-machine Republicans as mongrels, +enemies of the Republican party, and insisted that if the anti-machine +Republicans persisted in continuing with the anti-machine Democrats to +secure the passage of an effective Direct Primary law, the Republican +party in California would go to smash. + +The arrogant course of the machine members of the Election Laws +Committee, had at least one good effect it drove the anti-machine +Republicans and the anti machine Democrats together as a matter of +self-defense. The anti-machine Republicans and Democrats saw the machine +Democrats and Republicans united to defeat the passage of an effective +Direct Primary measure. So the anti-machine Republicans and Democrats +organized that they might successfully combat the organized machine +Democrats and Republicans. For the first time in the history of the +California Legislature, so far as the writer knows, the Senate divided +on the only practical line of division for the enactment of good +measures and the defeat of bad ones - with the anti-machine Senators on +one side and the machine Senators on the other. + +The "band-wagon" Senators of the Welch variety, and the doubtful +Senators, were left for the moment to herd by themselves. + +The anti-machine forces held meetings - caucuses if you like - to decide +upon the course to be pursued. They numbered at first twenty members, +fifteen Republicans and five Democrats. The Republicans were Bell, +Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Burnett, Cutten, Estudillo, Hurd, Price, +Roseberry, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker and Wright; the +Democrats, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Miller and Holohan. George +Van Smith, of the San Francisco Call, credited with being an expert on +Direct Primary legislation, was admitted to the deliberations of the +twenty. + +Senator Price, however, became alarmed at the irregularity of +anti-machine Republicans meeting with anti machine Democrats, gathered +his virtuous partisan skirts about him and fled in dismay. + +Senator Caminetti also left the meeting. Caminetti is a strong advocate +of the Oregon plan for the election of United States Senators. When +Caminetti found Senator Wright, the accepted leader of the pro-primary +forces, opposed not only to the Oregon plan, but to any plan that would +give electors a State-wide vote for United States Senators, he refused +to go to Wright's assistance. Later on, however, when Wright went to +Caminetti pleading for support, Caminetti agreed to abide by the +decisions of the anti-machine caucus. Curiously enough, after the +machine had worn the anti-machine forces out, Caminetti was the only +Senator who refused to accept the machine's amendments to the bill which +the anti-machine caucus had agreed upon. + +With Price and Caminetti out, the anti-machine forces were reduced to +eighteen Senators, although it was known that Rush sympathized with the +movement but was not present because he had been unavoidably detained. + +The eighteen organized by electing Senator Estudillo chairman, and +Senator Boynton secretary. Senator Wright made a short address in which +he virtually threw up his hands. He told what the Wolfe-Leavitt element +had done with the bill in committee, and stated that unless the +anti-machine forces got together, the machine would amend the measure +into ineffectiveness. Following Wright's address the anti-machine +Senators considered the original Wright-Stanton bill under three heads: + +(1) Shall a mere plurality, or a majority, or a high plurality be +required to nominate at a primary election? + +(2) Shall the partisan features be eliminated from the measure? + +(3) Shall the provisions of the measure be extended to the election of +United States Senators? + +The first question was brought up on Stetson's motion that a twenty-five +per cent plurality be required to nominate. The machine aimed to fix the +plurality at forty per cent, but even the twenty-five per cent +compromise was denied. The motion received but four votes, in its favor. + +Then came discussion of the clause quoted in the previous chapter, which +requires of each primary candidate that he make affidavit that he +supported his party ticket at the previous election, and proposes to +support it at the coming election. It was understood by all who had any +thing to do with the Direct Primary bill that the clause made it +impossible for a primary candidate to run on two primary tickets. +Cartwright moved that the clause be stricken from the bill. The motion +was lost by a vote of 14 to 4. Senators like Black of Santa Clara voted +against the motion in the interest of harmony, although personally they +favored the elimination of all partisan features. + +The question of primary nomination of candidates for the United States +Senate was then taken up. Senator Wright moved that the vote for +Senators be advisory only, and that it be by Assembly and Senatorial +districts instead of State-wide, as the original bill provided. The vote +was as follows: + +For Wright's motion - Burnett, Wright - 2. + +Against Wright's motion - Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Cartwright, +Cutten, Holohan, Miller, Roseberry, Stetson, Strobridge, Walker - 12. + +Excused from voting - Campbell, Estudillo, Hurd, Thompson. + +A scene of great confusion followed. Campbell, who had refused to vote +because he insisted upon the Oregon plan of electing United States +Senators by direct vote of The People, insisted that the provision be +incorporated into the bill. He refused to be bound by any plan that +would restrict the election within party lines. So they blocked Campbell +in one corner of the room with a table, and reasoned with him. +Twenty-one votes were required to pass the Direct Primary bill in the +Senate. At that time counting Rush, who was not present at the caucus, +the anti-machine forces had only nineteen. They could not afford to lose +even one of their number. + +Above the confusion, Senator Holohan managed to make his voice heard. + +"Gentlemen," he said, "I would like to have the Oregon plan incorporated +into this bill, But that seems to be impracticable at this time. +Eventually, I am sure California will adopt the Oregon plan of naming +the United States Senator, which to my way of thinking is the most +common sense, the fairest, the most American plan. But if we are to pass +a Direct Primary measure at the present session, we must reach a basis +of compromise. Let us now get together and stand together on a measure +upon which we can all agree. Let us pledge ourselves to abide by the +decision of this meeting, and stand or fall by the bill which we have +agreed upon." + +Holohan's counsel prevailed. The Senators present pledged themselves to +abide by the decision of the meeting and to stand or fall by the bill +which they had agreed upon. And Senator Leroy A. Wright was among them +and was bound in honor as every Senator present was bound in honor to +stand by the bill which had been agreed upon. + +The uniting of the anti-machine Senators to fight the combined machine +Democrats and Republicans called down upon the anti-machine element the +denunciation of the machine press. The Catkins newspapers, for example, +sputtered their condemnation of Republican Senators who would unite with +Democratic Senators in "rump caucus." + +On the other hand the San Francisco Call, at that time warmly supporting +the anti-machine movement in the Senate, was extreme in denouncing +Lieutenant-Governor Porter, presiding officer of the Senate, Leavitt, +Wolfe, and all others who were opposing the passage of the Direct +Primary measure as it had originally been introduced by Wright, and as +it had been agreed upon in the reform caucus[38]. + +The fight in the Senate came on the second reading of the bill February +18th. On the 16th, however, the setting for the contest had been fixed +by the majority of the Committee on Election Laws, which reported with +favorable recommendation the measure as the Committee had cut it to +pieces. The minority of the Committee, Estudillo, Stetson and Wright, +reported back the bill agreed upon by the non-partisan caucus of +anti-machine Senators. + +But the fight did not come over either report. When the bill came up on +the 18th for second reading and amendment, Senator McCartney, on behalf +of the machine forces, introduced a resolution over which the contest +waged. McCartney's resolution provided that the bill should be so +amended that the primary vote for United States Senator should be by +districts and advisory only, and that for county and local offices a +vote of 25 per cent and for State offices a vote of 40 per cent should +nominate[39]. + +The debate was over this resolution. The motion for its adoption was +defeated by a vote of twenty-seven against to thirteen for[40]. + +Incidentally, the debate settled one of the most important questions +affecting the bill, namely, the percentage of votes to be required for +primary nominations. The machine, to render the measure inoperative, was +contending for a majority or at least a high plurality vote, while the +anti-machine element was contending for a mere plurality. The debate +developed the fact, that any provision for other than a mere plurality +vote would be unconstitutional. This service was performed by Senator +Cutten of Humboldt[41]. Senator Cutten's clear presentation of this much +discussed point, settled the vote percentage question right there. When +the measure was under consideration by the Assembly Election Laws +Committee, Grove L. Johnson did suggest that a 40 per cent plurality be +required to nominate. But no serious attempt was made so to amend the +bill, after Cutten's speech, and the defeat of the McCartney amendment. + +Naturally, the anti-machine forces felt warmly encouraged by this +complete defeat of the machine. The San Francisco Call, the recognized +advocate of the Direct Primary bill, the next day, February 19th, said +of the outcome: + + "Twenty-seven Senators at Sacramento stood true to their party + pledges, and voiced the will of the people in their votes on the + Direct Primary bill yesterday. Thirteen other Senators wrote into + the record conclusive proof of their unfitness for the offices they + hold, when they voted against the Wright-Stanton bill, and for the + corrupt political machine which is the Southern Pacific Railroad. + Every man of these thirteen confessed corruptionists knew what he + was doing, knew whose will he was putting above The People's. Every + one of these thirteen betrayers of the public weal has written the + epitaph of his political tombstone." + +The Call was as generous in its praise of the anti-machine Democrats and +Republicans as it was bitter against the machine Senators who had +endeavored to force the McCartney amendment into the bill. While that +paper printed the names of the thirteen in bold, black type on the first +page under the heading, "These Men Voted for the Machine," in type just +as bold and just as black it printed in an honor column the names of the +twenty-seven who had voted against the McCartney amendment, under the +heading, "These Men Voted for the People." + +Said the Call in its admirable report of the defeat of the McCartney +amendment, of the original nineteen anti-machine Senators who had +organized to resist the machine: + + "Genuine manhood has been on tap at every conference of the + independents. They have not squabbled for partisan advantage. They + have worked together to give The People an honest and genuine + Direct Primary measure. Senator Wright won a brilliant fight. He + won it with and through the earnest co-operation of the unbossed + Democrats and Republicans." + +Said the Call of the measure itself in its issue of February 18th - the +day of the defeat of the machine Senators: + + "The Direct Primary bill is The People's bill. Such men as Dooling, + Wright, Stanton, Davis and Cartwright made it. There is no honest + argument against it, there will be no honest Senators against it." + +Such was the view of the Call on February 18. Few were willing to +believe on that date that within a month the Call would have thrown its +influence on the side of Leavitt and Wolfe and Warren Porter in an +attempt to force part of the McCartney amendment into the Direct Primary +bill. It did not seem possible then that within a month the Call would +be denouncing, ridiculing and misrepresenting Senators whose efforts had +resulted in the defeat of the McCartney amendment because of the refusal +of these anti-machine Senators to join with the machine Senators whom +they had once defeated, and accept the amendment which they had once +rejected. It did not then seem possible that on March 18th the Call +would be behind the thirteen "betrayers of the public weal," itself +betraying the Senators whose "genuine manhood" had on February 18 +appealed to its editors so strongly. + +But such was to be. And, too, the combination of Calkins Syndicate, +Lieutenant-Governor Porter, Senator Leroy A. Wright, the San Francisco +Call and the thirteen "betrayers of the public weal" proved too much for +the little band of anti-machine Senators. And what is more, backed by +the Call, the machine leaders finally amended the Direct Primary bill, +which on February 18th the Call had stated very positively no honest +Senator would be against. + + + +[37] Wright's amendment had been carefully typewritten before the +meeting. It read as follows, + +"Party candidates for the office of United States Senator shall have +their name placed on the official primary election ballots of their +respective parties in the manner herein provided for State Office, +provided, however, that the vote for candidate for United States Senator +shall be an advisory vote for the purpose of ascertaining the sentiment +of the voters in their respective parties." + +[38] On February 17th the Call said of Senator Eddie Wolfe's opposition +to the bill: + +"The fight (Direct Primary) promises to be both spirited and bitter. +Eddie Wolfe of San Francisco, picked by the machine to make its fight +for the garroting of the Direct Primary bill, by the injection of a +majority nominating clause, has served notice that he proposes to tear +the reformers to pieces." + +Of Leavitt and other machine Senators, the Call on the same date said: + +"Leavitt, who bossed the fight against the Otis-Walker bill, will +furnish the brains for the fight against the Direct Primary bill, and +every one of the seven who voted against the Otis-Walker bill, are more +or less frankly against the primary bill. Savage, who did not vote +against the Walker-Otis bill because his vote would have done no good, +and Hartman and Hare, who did vote against the Otis-Walker bill, have +gone on record against honest direct Primaries, as members of the +majority of the Senate Committee on Election Laws. Savage is frank +enough to admit that he is opposed to any direct primary law." + +[39] The McCartney resolution was in full-as follows: + +"Resolved, That Senate Bill No. 3, and all pending amendments thereto, +be and the same is hereby referred to the Committee on Elections and +Election Laws, with the following instructions: + +"1. Amend the bill so as to give an advisory vote by districts on United +States Senators." + +"2. Amend the bill by providing for a percentage of votes before +nomination by direct vote of the people, as follows: If the highest +candidate for any county or local office receive less than 25 per cent +of the vote of his party, and if the highest candidate for a State +office receive less than 40 per cent of the vote of his party, that the +nomination shall be referred to a convention of delegates elected at the +same time that candidates are voted on by direct vote." + +"3. Amend the bill by providing that the convention aforesaid shall +prepare the platform of the party and perfect party organization." + +[40] The vote in full was as follows: + +Against the McCartney amendment and in effect for the bill agreed upon +by the anti-machine Senators: Anthony, Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, +Burnett, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, Estudillo, +Holohan, Hurd, Lewis, Martinelli, Miller, Price, Roseberry, Rush, +Sanford, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker, Welch, Wright - 27. + +For the McCartney amendment and in effect against the bill agreed upon +by the anti-machine Senators: Bates, Bills, Finn, Hare, Hartman, +Kennedy, Leavitt, McCartney, Reily, Savage, Weed, Willis, Wolfe - 13. + +[41] Cutten showed that Section 13, Article XX of the State Constitution +provides that "a plurality of the votes given at any election shall +constitute a choice where not otherwise directed in this Constitution." + +Senator Cutten then proceeded to demonstrate that a primary election is +an election within the meaning of the terms used. The Supreme Court of +Indiana has so declared, and, coming nearer home, Cutten showed that the +California Supreme Court has so held also. + +In The People vs. Cavanaugh, 112 California, the Supreme Court held that +any primary election that should become mandatory becomes an election +and only those primaries that may be optional with a party as to whether +or not they should be held, are not elections. + +The Wright-Stanton bill and the Direct Primary amendment to the +Constitution make the direct primaries mandatory, nor is there anything +in the State Constitution providing that anything other than a plurality +vote shall be required to nominate. For the Legislature to have yielded +to the machine's demand that a majority or high plurality vote be +required to nominate and inserted such a provision in the Direct Primary +bill, would have been to render that measure unconstitutional, for under +the plain provisions of the Constitution only a plurality vote can be +required to nominate. + +Were a majority or even high percentage plurality vote required to +nominate, the Direct Primary law would have been made unconstitutional, +because: + +1. A plurality might not be equal to the percentage or majority. + +2. A percentage or majority contemplates a convention to nominate in +case the candidate does not receive the percentage or majority, and a +convention, the best authorities hold, is prohibited under the +constitutional amendment providing for the primary election. + + + +Chapter X. + +Fight Over Assembly Amendments. + +Machine Succeeds in Amending the Direct Primary Bill in the Assembly - +Assemblyman Pulcifer at Critical Moment Votes with the Machine - Senate, +Although Held Up By Machine Element for a Week, Refuses to Concur in +Assembly's Action. + + + +The machine Senators, having failed to amend the Direct Primary bill on +its second reading, apparently accepted their whipping, and allowed the +measure to go through third reading and final passage without +opposition[42]. + +Twenty-seven Senators at the final roll call voted for it; not one vote +was cast against it. Even Leavitt and Wolfe voted for it. The +anti-machine Senators had won "a glorious victory." + +But the victory was one tempered with grave misgivings on the part of +careful observers of machine trickery. The fact that the bill as it had +passed the Senate contained several serious clerical and typographical +errors, and that its title was unsatisfactory if not defective, worried +the genuine supporters of the bill not a little. The bill had been +loosely drawn to begin with, and as originally introduced contained most +unfortunate clerical errors, which bobbed up at most inopportune times. + +At every stage of its passage in the Senate such errors were uncovered, +and after it had passed second reading, no less than eight serious +errors were discovered to be still in the bill. The only way these +errors could be corrected was by amendment. + +The errors were called to the attention of Senator Wright and of George +Van Smith of the Call, who were urged to have them corrected in the +Senate that the bill might go to the Assembly letter perfect, and +without necessity of amendment[43]. But both Van Smith and Wright were +of the opinion that time would be gained by leaving the Assembly to make +the corrections. + +The bill as it finally passed the Senate was a defective bill, the +defects of which could be corrected in the Assembly only by amendment. +In the end the fate of the measure was made to hinge on these clerical +and typographical defects. + +The Assembly Committee on Election Laws had been stacked against the +passage of a Direct Primary bill, precisely as the Senate Committee had +been. At the first meeting held by the Committee to consider the +measure, it became evident that the majority of the Committee would, if +it could, put the McCartney amendments, which had been defeated in the +Senate, into the bill. + +Leeds, Chairman of the Committee, moved that the primary vote for United +States Senator be made advisory and by districts only, while Grove L. +Johnson, in spite of the fact that such a provision is impracticable and +unconstitutional, stated that he wished a provision in the bill +requiring a 40 per cent plurality to nominate, instead of a mere +plurality. + +Leeds and Johnson, taken together, stood for precisely what the machine +had stood for in the Senate, namely, an advisory, district vote for +United States Senators and a 40 per cent plurality vote to nominate. + +Speaker Stanton, although not a member of the Committee, was present at +the meeting, and although he had introduced the bill in the Assembly, +announced that he was for so amending the measure that the vote for +United States Senator should be made merely advisory and by districts. +This was pretty strong intimation that there was trouble ahead for the +Direct Primary bill. Stanton was in effect throwing down his own bill. + +After several meetings, the Committee adopted amendments providing for +the Leeds - suggested advisory district vote for United States Senators, +providing for correction of the clerical and typographical errors, and +providing an oath from primary candidates that they would abide by the +platform of their party to be adopted after their nomination. This last +amendment was defeated in the Assembly. + +The only real opposition in the Committee to the machine's plan to make +the primary vote for United States Senators advisory only and by +district, came from Assemblymen Hinkle of San Diego and Drew of Fresno. +Drew was ill most of the time and could not attend the meetings. The +brunt of the fight for a State-wide vote for United States Senators, +therefore, fell on Hinkle. + +He fought well. + +Every effort was made to pull him down. He was told that his bills would +be "killed." + +He was deliberately misrepresented in papers which were endeavoring to +force into the bill the advisory district vote amendment, which, as +introduced in the Senate by McCartney, had been rejected by the +anti-machine Senators. Leavitt and Wolfe and Warren Porter were for the +amendment, but the anti-machine Senators continued against it as they +had on February 18th, the day of their "glorious victory" over the +machine in the Direct Primary fight. + +But, astonishing as it may seem, the San Francisco Call[44], which up to +the passage of the bill in the Senate had fought the machine Senators so +valiantly, was giving indication of siding with Wolfe and Leavitt. In +its issue of March 6th, the Call stated that Hinkle was alone of the +Assembly Committee battling for the bill as it passed the Senate. In +another sentence the Call said: "Leeds, Rech, Hinkle and Pugh voted for +the advisory vote amendments." + +That sentence was shown about the Capitol, and on it was based the story +that Hinkle had "fallen down," and would vote with the machine. All this +added to the confusion of the situation. + +But Hinkle had not "fallen down." He was in the fight just as hard as +ever, and with Assemblyman Bohnett organized the reform element in the +Assembly to fight the machine amendments. + +Those who were endeavoring to force the advisory district plan for +nomination of Senators into the bill took the most astonishing methods +to force it upon the anti-machine Senators. For example, the San +Francisco Call of March 4th said of it: + + "The amendments proposed by Leeds and supported by Stanton are not even +remotely related to the McCartney proposition, which was voted down in +the Senate." + +The Call's statement was easily disproved, but it unquestionably +confused the anti-machine legislators, who were insisting upon retaining +the provision for State-wide vote for Senators in the bill[45]. + +And then came the cry that those who were opposing the Leeds-McCartney +amendment were enemies of the Direct Primary, for the Assembly, it was +alleged, was overwhelmingly in favor of the amendment, and would not +pass the bill without it. Jere Burke, John C. Lynch, and other patriots +of their ilk were most insistent in expression of this fear. But such +men as Bohnett, Hinkle, Drew and other recognized anti-machine leaders +in the Assembly were not to be bluffed in this way. They stood firmly +for the passage of the bill as it had passed the Senate. + +The fight on the floor of the Assembly came over Leeds' motion to amend +the bill by making the vote for United States Senator advisory only and +by districts. The vote on Leeds' motion was 37 to 37. The "overwhelming +majority" favoring the amendment, in spite of the use of every pull at +the command of the machine, had not materialized. As a majority vote was +necessary to read the amendment into the bill, a moment more and Speaker +Stanton would have been forced to declare the amendment lost. This would +have meant final defeat for the machine, and the Direct Primary bill as +it had passed the Senate would have gone to final passage. + +At this critical moment in the bill's history, however, Assemblyman +Pulcifer[46], the Lincoln-Roosevelt League member from Alameda county, +got into action. He had voted against the amendment. But with his vote +really meaning defeat for the machine element, he promptly changed his +vote from no to aye. This made the vote 38 for the amendment and 36 +against it. The amendment which the anti-machine Senators had fought so +valiantly and so effectively was finally read into the bill[47]. + +The amendments necessary to correct the typographical and clerical +errors which had been permitted to remain in the bill as it passed the +Senate, together with a number of ridiculous amendments - which were +finally rejected by both Houses - were then adopted, and the bill sent +to the Senate[48]. + +The fact developed almost immediately that if the Senate refused to +concur in the Assembly amendment forcing the advisory district vote into +the bill the Assembly would recede from the amendment. As a matter of +fact Assemblyman Collum, who voted for the amendment March 9th, voted on +March 22d to recede from it. Had the anti-machine forces in the Assembly +been held together, as they could have been had the question of receding +been put up to them fairly, few other changes with Collum's would have +been sufficient to assure success for the anti-machine forces. + +But in spite of the situation in the Assembly, Senator Wright, who was +by this time working openly with Wolfe, Leavitt and Warren Porter to +secure the adoption of the Leeds amendment (which as the McCartney +amendment the Senate had already rejected), was insisting that the +Assembly would not recede, and that unless the Senate concurred with the +Assembly amendment, nothing could save the Direct Primary bill from +being cut to pieces in Free Conference Committee. + +Nevertheless, the Senate by a vote of 19 against to 20 for concurrence, +did refuse to concur, 21 votes being necessary for concurrence. + +Senator Stetson was absent when the vote was taken, being ill at his +home in Alameda county. Had he been present he would have voted against +concurrence in the amendments. This would have made the vote 20 to 20. + +Originally, on February 18th, twenty-seven Senators had voted against +the Leeds-McCartney amendment, but when Senator Wright switched to the +machine, Senators Hurd and Burnett wobbled along after him. The four +band-wagon Senators, Lewis, Martinelli, Price and Welch, tagged along +after them. This made the vote: + +Against concurrence in the amendment and for the bill as it passed the +Senate - Anthony, Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Caminetti, Campbell, +Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, Estudillo, Holohan, Miller, Roseberry, Rush, +Sanford, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker - 19. + +For concurrence in the amendment and against the bill as it originally +passed the Senate - Bates, Bills, Burnett, Finn, Hare, Hartman, Hurd, +Kennedy, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, McCartney, Price, Reily, Savage, +Weed, Welch, Willis, Wolfe, Wright - 20. + +Every one of the thirteen Senators who opposed the bill when it was +first before the Senate, voted to concur. Wright, Welch, Price, +Martinelli, Lewis, Burnett and Hurd joining them, made their number +twenty. + +Under the rules which govern the Senate, in the event of a tie vote, all +the Senators voting, the President of the Senate, in this case Warren +Porter, has the casting vote. + +Had Senator Stetson been present, he would have voted with the +anti-machine Senators. This would have made the vote 20 to 20. Warren +Porter would then have had the deciding vote. He would have voted to +concur. Senator Stetson's illness temporarily saved the Direct Primary +bill. + +In the ordinary course of legislative business, the Senate having +refused to concur in the Assembly amendment, the bill would have gone +back to the Assembly, the Assembly would have receded from the +amendment, and the machine's defeat would have been final. But the +quick-witted Wolfe saw a way to prevent such action. He promptly moved +that the Senate reconsider the vote by which it had refused to concur in +the Assembly amendment. Wolfe commanded twenty votes of the Senators +present, the anti-machine element nineteen. Wolfe required, however, +twenty-one to compel reconsideration. But when the question came up, +Wolfe still lacked the one vote necessary for reconsideration, the +anti-machine element was still without the necessary twenty votes to tie +the Senate, thus giving Warren Porter the deciding vote. Wolfe, however, +with his twenty votes, postponed consideration of his motion to +reconsider the vote by which the Senate had refused to concur. A +somewhat extraordinary parliamentary situation, to say the least. But it +answered the machine's purpose. For a week[49a] the machine was able to +hold the Senate in deadlock. All business was practically suspended. For +hours the reform Senators were compelled to sit in their seats waiting +the pleasure of President Porter and President Pro Tem. Wolfe to call +the Senate to order. The folly of permitting the machine to organize the +Senate was forced home to every good-government man present. The machine +because it controlled the Senate organization could and did arrogantly +override the rights of the Senate, giving the ultimatum that no business +should be transacted until the anti-machine Senators had concurred in +the machine amendments to the Direct Primary bill. + +The machine's play was to bully, bluff or beg one of the anti-machine +Senators to desert to the machine, which would have given the machine +twenty-one votes, enough for concurrence, or, failing in this, to force +the attendance of Senator Stetson, which would have tied the Senate, +thus giving Warren Porter the deciding vote. But before Senator Stetson, +pale and plainly on the verge of breakdown, could be brought to +Sacramento, Senator Black became very ill and was obliged to go to his +home at Palo Alto. Thus when Stetson returned, the vote stood 20 to 19, +precisely where it had been before. Performer Porter was still denied +the privilege of casting the deciding vote. For once the machine found +itself squarely against a stone wall, with the sympathy of the public +strongly against its creatures and methods. Night after night as the +fight went on, the Senate gallery was packed with interested spectators, +who cheered the anti-machine Senators to the echo. There were no cheers +for the machine, but on one occasion at least the machine was hissed, +when one of its creatures attempted an attack on Senator Black. + +Never did the machine work harder to switch anti-machine Senators to its +side. Jere Burke had characteristic corner conferences, Johnny Lynch +labored with anti-machine Senators openly on the floor of the Senate +chamber, as did Warren Porter. From a southern county came the Chairman +of the Republican County Committee to tell his Senator who was voting +with the anti-machine element what a mistake he was making. P. H. +McCarthy "happened in" and worked with George Van Smith of the Call and +Eddie Wolfe in the fruitless attempt made to "pull down" Senator +Anthony[49]. Anti-machine Senators found their pet bills being held up +in Assembly Committees. + +But the nineteen anti-machine members stood firm, in spite of the fact +that Senator Wright, who had originally led them, and George Van Smith, +of the Call, who had originally advised them, and the Call, which had +originally backed them, were all working on the side of Leavitt and +Wolfe and Porter and the thirteen Senators of whom the Call had said on +February 19, when they had voted for the amendment which they were still +supporting, "Every man of these thirteen confessed corruptionists knew +what he was doing - knew whose will he was putting above The People's +will. Every one of these thirteen betrayers of the public weal has +written the epitaph of his political tombstone." + +And then the machine forces attacked Senator Black. Although Senator +Black was lying ill at his home at Palo Alto, the Call on March 18 +stated that he was in hiding in Sacramento. + +The Call on the same date expressed its deep regret for and its utter +condemnation of, the "asinine filibuster, designed to prevent a tie vote +which would be decided by the Lieutenant-Governor, Warren Porter, in +favor of concurrence in the Assembly amendment to the Direct Primary +bill." + +On February 18 the Call had objected very strenuously to Porter's +attitude toward the Direct Primary bill. The Call on that date said: + + "To-day the wolves (a pet name for the machine Senators), urged by + their masters, will make their last stand in the Senate against a + people determined to be free. Warren Porter, the Lieutenant-Governor + of the fatted soul, who professes all the virtues and practices all + political evil, will be the whipper-in." + +One month later, March 18, the Call was complaining bitterly that the +anti-machine Senators would not permit the same "Lieutenant-Governor of +the fatted soul" to whip them into line for the amendment to the Direct +Primary bill, which they had rejected on February 18, and for which the +Call had praised them generously. The Call's special representative at +Sacramento, George Nan Smith, was by this time working openly with +Porter, Wolfe, Leavitt, Hartman, Lynch and Burke to compel Senate +concurrence in the Assembly amendments, while Senators Boynton, Black, +Miller, Campbell, Holohan, Stetson and the other anti-machine Senators +whom the Call had formerly backed in their efforts against the machine, +had become "pin-head politicians," in the columns of the Call, intent +upon defeat of the Direct Primary bill. + +The Call's extraordinary change and outrageous condemnation of the +anti-machine Senators of course brought its protest. The people of Palo +Alto met in mass meeting on March 21st, and adopted resolutions +condemning the Call's course[50]. Senator Black from his sick bed wrote +a letter showing the Call's insincerity and breach of faith with the +pro-primary Senators[51]. The paper was bitterly denounced on the floor +of the Senate. + +But throughout the State the newspapers which stand for good government, +and incidentally for an effective direct primary law, were firm in their +support of the anti-machine Senators. Just before Senator Black was +taken ill, for example, at the time when Senator Stetson was unable to +be at the capital, the Sacramento Star, in an editorial article under +the heading, "Illness a Blessing," cleverly put in a nutshell what the +people were thinking and the reform press was saying. "We do not desire +to wish Senator Stetson any bad luck," said The Star, "but if his slight +indisposition should continue for a few days, or, in lieu of that, if +some other solon of the same faith as regards the Primary bill can only +contract some minor ailment, there will be more joy than sorrow among +the people who want something approaching a real direct primary."[52] + +Matters were brought to a climax when the performers through Senator +Weed - who was, by the way, Chairman of the Committee on Public Morals, +which reported adversely on the Walker-Otis bill-introduced a +resolution, authorizing the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring Senator Black to +Sacramento, even though a special engine and coach be chartered for the +purpose[53]. The resolution brought forth indignant protest from the +anti-machine Senators, and a telegram from Senator Black to Warren +Porter, denouncing the unwarranted proceedings[54]. Nevertheless, Doctor +Douglass W. Montgomery of San Francisco, in spite of the fact that four +reputable physicians, Dr. Howard Black, Dr. H. B. Reynolds, Dr. J. C. +Spencer and Dr. R. L. Wilbur, had certified that Senator black's +physical condition did not permit of his being removed to Sacramento, +went to Palo Alto with the Sergeant-at-Arms to investigate the sick +Senator. Montgomery's investigations seem to have been confined to the +outside of Senator Black's house[55]. At any rate he did not see Senator +Black. The performance was given its sordid feature by Montgomery +charging the Senate $400 for his services. + +The Montgomery incident demonstrated clearly that the machine was +whipped[56]. Senator Wolfe accordingly on Monday, March 22, after +holding the Senate in deadlock more than a week, moved that the vote +whereby the Senate had refused to concur in the Assembly amendment to +the Direct Primary bill, be reconsidered. This, the Senate as a matter +of courtesy, at Senator Wolfe's request, did. It then refused to concur +in the Assembly's objectionable amendment. For the second time, the +Senate went on record against the machine's advisory district-vote plan +for the election of United States Senators. For the second time the +anti-machine element in the Senate, in its efforts to secure the passage +of an effective direct primary measure, had, fighting fair, and in the +open, and above board always, defeated the machine. The machine +thereupon met the anti-machine element with a trick that completely +turned the tables, a trick by which the anti-machine forces were +defeated, and the machine element placed in a position to amend the bill +as it might see fit. + + + +[42] Senator Wolfe, on the day of his defeat in the Senate, told the +writer that he would offer no further opposition to the passage of the +bill. + +[43] Charles R. Detrick of Palo Alto, for example, called the attention +of both Wright and Van Smith to the errors, and offered his services for +their correction, but his offer was declined. + +[44] The Call's course is all the more reprehensible from the fact that +it had for two years been declaring for an effective Direct Primary law, +and, indeed, assumed all the credit for the agitation for the reform. + +[45] The Leeds amendment, which the Call stated was in no way related to +the McCartney amendment, read as follows: + +"Party candidates for the office of United States Senator shall have +their names placed on the official primary election ballots of their +respective parties in the manner herein provided for State officers, +provided, however, that the vote for candidates for United States +Senator shall be an advisory vote for the purpose of ascertaining the +sentiment of the voters of the respective Senatorial and Assembly +Districts in the respective parties." + +The McCartney amendment of that section of the bill dealing with the +nomination of Senators read: + +"Amend the bill so as to give an advisory vote by districts on United +States Senators." + +It will be seen that the Leeds amendment and the McCartney amendment +were not remotely, but very closely related; were, in effect, the same. + +[46] A similar example of Pulcifer's trickiness attended the defeat in +the Assembly of Boynton's Senate bill providing for a nonpartisan column +on the election ballot for candidates for the Judiciary. The measure had +the backing of the reform element, and passed the Senate with but little +opposition. At that time it would have had even easier sailing in the +Assembly. But the machine succeeded in preventing action on the measure +In the Assembly until a few hours before adjournment. In the rush of the +close of the session, the measure, it is alleged, was made subject of +pretty vicious trading. But when it came to a showdown thirty-five votes +were cast for the measure and twenty-nine against. Six more votes would +have passed it. Had there been full attendance the bill would have been +passed. A call of the House was ordered to compel such attendance, but +was finally discontinued, by Pulcifer, who had voted for the bill, +voting for discontinuance, thus tying the vote. This gave Speaker +Stanton an opportunity to end proceedings under the call of the House, +by casting the deciding vote against continuance. Stanton, with +Pulcifer's assistance, thus cast what was practically the deciding vote +that killed the bill. Had the call of the House been continued until all +the Assemblymen were brought in, the measure would probably have been +passed. + +[47] The vote in full was as follows: + +For the amendment and against the bill as it had passed the Senate: +Barndollar, Beatty, Beban, Black, Butler, Coghlan, Collier, Collum, +Cronin, Cullen, Feeley, Greer, Hammon, Hanlon, Hans, Hawk, Grove L. +Johnson, Johnson of San Diego, Johnston of Contra Costa, Leeds, +Lightner, Macauley, McClellan, McManus, Melrose, Mott, Nelson, O'Neil, +Perine, Pugh, Pulcifer, Rech, Rutherford, Schmitt, Stanton, Transue, +Wagner, Wheelan - 38. + +Against the amendment and for the bill as it passed the Senate: +Beardslee, Bohnett, Callan, Cattell, Cogswell, Costar, Dean, Drew, +Flint, Gerdes, Gibbons, Gillis, Griffiths, Hayes, Hewitt, Hinkle, +Holmquist, Irwin, Johnson of Placer, Juilliard, Kehoe, Maher, +Mendenhall, Moore, Odom, Otis, Polsley, Preston, Sackett, Silver, +Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Whitney, Wilson, Wyllie, Young - 36. + +[48] When a bill passed by the Senate is amended in the Assembly the +measure goes back to the Senate. If the Senate concur in the amendments, +that settles the matter. But if the Senate refuse to concur, then the +bill goes back to the Assembly, where that body may recede from its +amendments or refuse to recede. + +If the Assembly recede, the measure goes to the Governor just as it +passed the Senate. If the Assembly refuse to recede, the measure is +referred to a conference committee of six, three appointed by the +Speaker of the Assembly and three by the President of the Senate. + +The Conference Committee may consider only the amendments adopted by the +Assembly. If the Conference Committee fail to agree, or if either Senate +or Assembly reject its report, then the bill goes to a Committee on Free +Conference. The Committee on Free Conference is permitted to make any +amendment it sees fit. If its report be rejected by either Senate or +Assembly, the bill gets no further; is dead, without possibility of +resurrection. + +Such was the maze of technicality into which Lincoln-Roosevelt Leaguer +Pulcifer threw the Direct Primary bill when he changed his vote from no +to aye on the Leeds amendment. + +[49a] The postponements were made from hour to hour. The reform Senators +would be informed that the matter would be taken up at eleven o'clock in +the forenoon. At that hour, the machine would postpone consideration +until three o'clock in the afternoon. At three o'clock, further +postponement would be ordered until eight o'clock. At eight o'clock +there would be postponement until the next morning. Twenty-one votes +were necessary for concurrence in the Assembly Amendments, but a +majority of those voting was sufficient to secure postponement. The +machine on this issue controlled twenty votes, one short of enough for +concurrence, but one more than the nineteen controlled by the +anti-machine element, and hence enough to postpone from hour to hour +consideration of Wolfe's motion. + +[49] It is very amusing less than three months later to see those +partners of the Direct Primary fight, P. H. McCarthy and the San +Francisco Call, in fierce political conflict at San Francisco. + +[50] The resolutions adopted at Palo Alto read: "Resolved, That we note +with disapproval the changed attitude of the San Francisco Call upon the +Direct Primary bill, and its attempt to discredit Senator Black and +other friends of good government in the Legislature." + +[51] Senator Black's letter covered the situation fully. It was +addressed to the press of the State, and was as follows: "No decent +primary law would have been possible but for the combination of thirteen +Republicans and seven Democrats in the Senate who have stood together +throughout this whole fight. Senator Wright and the 'Call' were +powerless in the contest until these twenty Senators got behind them. + +"One of the conditions of this combination was a State-wide vote on +United States Senator, and the 'Call' fought with us against Senators +Wolfe and Leavitt on this proposition. Immediately after the bill left +the Senate and got into the Assembly the 'Call' began to display a lack +of interest in the primary fight. If it had maintained its attitude in +favor of the original bill these amendments never would have been +proposed by the Assembly." + +"When the question of concurring in the Assembly amendments comes up, we +find the 'Call' and Senator Wright deserting the men who made the +primary fight in the Senate and going over to the camp of the 'push' +politicians, who have always favored the district plan of nominating +United States Senators." + +"I take issue with the 'Call' when it says: 'As a matter of fact, the +whole question of the United States Senatorship is of little importance +to the people of California,' etc." + +"The United States Senatorship is the most important office to be filled +by the people of California under the provisions of the proposed Direct +Primary law. The so-called district plan for nominating United States +Senators is worse than a makeshift. it provides for no pledge on the +part of candidates and would be purely a straw vote, binding on nobody." + +"The stubborn fact remains that the 'Call,' after leading in the fight +for an honest Direct Primary law for two years and a half, has deserted +the cause of the people at the most critical moment of the struggle." + + "MARSHALL BLACK." + +[52] The Star's clever editorial article is worth preserving. It was in +full as follows: "There are times, it appears, when the illness of a +statesman is good for the people. We do not desire to wish Senator +Stetson any bad luck, but if his slight indisposition should continue +for a few days, or, in lieu of that, if some other solon of the same +faith as regards the Primary bill, can only contract some minor ailment, +there will be more joy than sorrow among the people who want something +approaching a real direct primary. + +"As explained in The Star's news columns, had Senator Stetson not been +ill, a tie vote on the proposition to concur with the Assembly in +amending the primary bill, presumably in the interest of Senator Frank +Flint and generally to machine advantage, would have occurred. And then +- it's unkind to say such things - any person with a grain of sense +would know that Mr. 'Performing' Porter, our honored and distinguished +Lieutenant-Governor, would break the tie by casting his vote for the +machine. + +"The evident intention of Senators who stand for the Wright bill in its +original form, which is a start toward a real direct primary (and that +doesn't include Senator Wright, more's the pity) to dodge the +possibility of the tie vote by absenting themselves without leave is +regrettable - regrettable only because it is necessary. Their action, +with the aim of serving the best interests of the people, is highly +honorable compared with the tactics of the powers that be, even unto the +Governor himself, who have been trying every means to club legislators +into line to stand by the 'organization' and defeat the will of the +people. + +"It's hard to be very sorry just now over Senator Stetson's illness, but +he deserves a vote of thanks for contracting that cold. And another for +being on the right side." + +[53] The Weed resolution reads as follows: "Resolved, By the Senate of +the State of California, That the President of the Senate be and he is +hereby authorized to instruct the Sergeant-at-Arms to Proceed at once to +Palo Alto with a competent physician, to be named by the President of +the Senate, for the purpose of ascertaining whether it is safe for +Senator Black to proceed at once to Sacramento, to attend as a member of +the Senate the thirty-eighth session of the California Legislature, and + +"Be it further resolved, That in the event that such examination results +in disclosing a state of health wherein it will be safe for Senator +Black to be present, then the Sergeant-at-Arms shall bring him at once +to Sacramento and, if necessary, to secure an engine and coach for that +purpose." + +[54] Black's answering telegram was in full as follows: "I beg to inform +you (Lieutenant-Governor Porter) and through you the Senate of +California that I regard the resolutions adopted last Saturday in +reference to my absence, as discourteous, as a reflection on my honor +and integrity and as proposing an infringement on my privileges and +rights as a Senator and citizen. I have, therefore declined to see the +persons sent here under that resolution, and shall continue to decline +to see them until my physicians inform me that I can with safety return +to Sacramento. + +"Ample evidence of my physical condition has been presented to your +representatives by four reputable physicians, and these physicians have +furnished and will furnish evidence of my condition from time to time as +requested by you or by the Senate. + + "MARSHALL BLACK." + +[55] Dr. Montgomery's $400 report will be found in the appendix. + +[56] The schemes resorted to to get Black back to Sacramento are almost +beyond belief. It was even intimated to him that his bills would be held +up if he did not return. The following telegram scarcely requires +comment: + + Sacramento Cal Mch 20-09 +Hon. Marshall Black, + +Palo Alto, Cal. + +Your bill to issue bonds for general improvement fund before me. I would +like to have you here to explain its provisions and the necessity for +it. +12-50Pm J. N. GILLETT. + + + +Chapter XI. + +Machine Amends Direct Primary Bill[57]. + +By Trick Prevents Senate From Concurring in Amendments to Correct +Clerical and Typographical Errors, Thus Creating a Situation Which Threw +the Measure Into a Committee on Free Conference With Power to Amend. + + + +It is a very good rule to be sure that your rattlesnake is dead before +placing yourself in a position to be bitten. The reform Senators +neglected this rule, with the result that after they had the machine +element whipped on the direct primary issue, they placed themselves in +a position where the "performers" struck at them viciously, and snatched +victory from them. + +As was shown in a previous chapter, the Direct Primary bill, after it +had originally passed the Senate in the face of machine opposition, was +allowed to go to the Assembly containing several serious clerical and +typographical errors. The Assembly corrected these errors by a series of +ten amendments. It was necessary for the Senate to concur in these +amendments to get the bill into proper form. The amendments added in the +Assembly to which the anti-machine Senators took exception, were seven +in number and dealt principally with the changing of the method of +electing United States Senators, from the plan of State-wide vote, to +that of district, advisory vote. The seven were known as the "vicious +amendments"; the ten correcting the typographical errors were called the +"necessary amendments." There is no good reason why the ten necessary +amendments should not have been made before the bill was first sent to +the Assembly. But they were not, and the errors which were thus left in +the bill served the machine most advantageously when the final fight +came. After Wolfe had given up hope of compelling the reform Senators to +concur in the vicious amendments read into the bill in the Assembly, his +play was to bring about a situation by which the bill would be thrown +into a Committee on Free Conference. The committee would be appointed by +President Porter of the Senate, and by Speaker Stanton of the Assembly. +Such a committee would, of course, be in sympathy with machine policies, +and could be counted upon to amend the bill to the machine's liking. +There is little doubt that the machine leaders in the Senate and the +machine leaders in the Assembly acted in conjunction in the proceedings +which followed Senator Wolfe's action in abandoning his efforts to force +the anti-machine Senators to support the so called vicious Assembly +amendments. + +Wolfe's first move was to ask as a matter of courtesy that the Senate +adopt his motion to reconsider the vote by which it had the week before +refused to concur in the Assembly amendment. This request the reform +element granted, purely as a matter of courtesy. Wolfe then edged up a +step nearer. + +No sooner had he received the courtesy of reconsideration than both he +and Leavitt were to the fore with a suggestion that the Senate should +refuse to concur in all the amendments and let them be threshed out in +the Assembly. The purpose of the two machine leaders was apparent. + +Had the Senate concurred in the ten Assembly amendments made necessary +to correct typographical errors, and refused to concur in the seven +objectionable amendments, all that would have been necessary would have +been for the Assembly to recede from its objectionable amendments. But +if Wolfe could so engineer matters that the Senate would refuse to +concur in all the amendments, then it would be necessary for the +Assembly to recede from all its amendments, including those intended to +correct typographical errors, or send the bill to a conference +committee, to be selected by Stanton and Porter. From a Committee on +Conference to a Committee on Free Conference, also to be appointed by +Stanton and Porter, and with full power to amend the bill to its liking, +was but a step. The Committee on Free Conference was Wolfe's aim. He +eventually got it. + +Boynton and Walker were quick to see the trend of Wolfe's requests, +however, and Walker moved to vote on the seven vicious amendments on one +roll call, and on the ten correcting the typographical and clerical +errors on a second. + +As a substitute Wolfe moved that the seventeen amendments be passed upon +under one roll call. + +At first Senators Cutten and Stetson apparently could not see the trend +of Wolfe's scheming. In the debate that ensued Wolfe pretended +indignation that his motives were being questioned. + +There was very good reason for questioning Senator Wolfe's motives, but +Cutten and Stetson and even Walker assured Wolfe that no reflection upon +him was intended. What these men should have done was to have denounced +Wolfe right there as a trickster and made no bones about it. But on the +absurd assumption that a member of the State Senate is necessarily a +gentleman, the much deserved denunciation did not come. + +However, Wolfe's motion did not prevail and the amendments were taken up +one by one. Six of the seven vicious amendments were rejected, the first +of the six by a vote of 19 to 20. + +This brought the Senate to the amendments intended to correct +typographical and clerical errors. And here the vote switched. The +reformers had up to this time been voting to reject the amendments, +because the amendments were objectionable, while the programmers in the +first instance voted for concurrence. But when it came to amendments +intended to correct typographical and clerical errors only, Wolfe and +his following, with the exception of Burnett, who refused to stand for +any such dastardly piece of work, voted to refuse to concur in the +amendments, while the anti-machine Senators, of course, voted to concur +in them. + +Burnett, voting with the anti-machine element, gave them twenty votes, +leaving Wolfe and his following only nineteen. But twenty-one votes were +necessary for concurrence. The machine, while it could not force the +Senate to concur in the vicious amendments, could prevent the Senate's +concurrence in the amendments to correct the clerical and typographical +errors. The bill was accordingly sent back to the Assembly with the +typographical and clerical amendments still in dispute. + +Even before the bill had reached the Assembly, Senator Frank Leavitt and +George Van Smith of The Call were on the floor of that body, fighting to +prevent the Assembly receding from its amendments. + +When the Assembly grasped the fact that the Senate had refused to concur +in the amendments necessary for correction of typographical errors, +those who were working for an effective Direct Primary bill were thrown +into the greatest confusion. Speaker Stanton's rulings which followed, +were not calculated to relieve the situation. Speaking from the desk, +Stanton said: + +"If you recede from some of these amendments and not from others where +will your bill be? It will be dead. The only thing that you can do to +save the Direct Primary bill now is to recede from all the amendments +and let the typographical errors remain in the bill, or refuse to recede +from any of the amendments and let the bill go into conference. If you +recede from some of the amendments and not from others, your bill is +dead. We cannot send this bill back to the Senate saying that the +Assembly has receded from some of the amendments and not from others." + +Assemblymen Preston, Bohnett and others who were standing for an +effective measure, were amazed at the position which Stanton had taken. + +"I cannot for the life of me," said Preston, "see why we cannot recede +from part of the amendments and refuse to recede from the others. Some +of these amendments are really necessary for the good of the bill. +Others should be rejected. Give me fifteen minutes and I will guarantee +to dig up authorities which will show us the course to be pursued." + +Assemblyman Bohnett confessed himself unable to understand why the +Assembly could not send part of the amendments to conference and not the +others. + +By this time matters had got so warm in the Assembly that Senator +Leavitt found it necessary to lend dignity to the occasion by taking his +seat at the side of Speaker Stanton, whom he engaged in conversation. +The conference was, of course, carried on in whispers. + +Assemblymen Young, Bohnett and others, finding that it would be +impossible under the assumption of the Speaker to refuse to recede from +part of the amendments while receding from the others, advised the good +government members to refuse to recede from all the amendments, and pass +the bill, typographical errors and all. + +It was demanded of Bohnett if this would not lead to the practical +defeat of the measure. Bohnett insisted that it would not; that the +typographical errors, while deplorable, did not materially affect the +bill. + +However, many of the better element of the Assembly did not dare to take +the risk, and the motion to recede was lost by a vote of 29 to 42[51]. + +Assemblymen who unquestionably stood for a good bill voted against +receding. Had the vicious amendments alone been under consideration, +they would have voted to recede. Among these were such men as +Assemblyman Drew of Fresno. The Assembly, having refused to recede from +its amendments, the bill went to a Committee on Conference, appointed by +Speaker Stanton and President Porter. The machine had gained its point. + +The Conference Committee consisted of Senators Wolfe, Leavitt and +Wright, and Assemblymen Leeds, Johnson of Sacramento, and Hewitt. Of the +Committee, Hewitt[59] was the only member who favored a Statewide vote +for United States Senator, and opposed the advisory district vote. The +committee had scarcely been missed from Senate and Assembly chambers +before it was back to report that no agreement could be reached. + +The same members were thereupon appointed as a Committee on Free +Conference, which gave them power to amend the bill. As a Committee on +Free Conference they recommended the advisory district vote plan for the +nomination of United States Senators[60]. + +Senator Wolfe, having got the bill in shape to his liking, with a suave +smirk upon his face, stated that he trusted that all the Senators +present would vote for the measure. + +"Not on your life," came Caminetti's protest. + +And Caminetti did not vote for the Free Conference Committee's report. + +But in spite of Caminetti's protest, both Senate and Assembly adopted +the Conference Committee's report. They had to do so or defeat the bill +entirely. Caminetti was the only Senator who voted against it. The +machine, after a fight of nearly two months, in which it was twice +defeated in the Senate, and escaped defeat in the Assembly by only one +vote, that of Pulcifer, had carried its point, had succeeded in denying +the people of California the privilege of casting a practical, +State-wide vote for United States Senators. + +What the anti-machine Senators[61] thought of the outcome is best +expressed in the little speech which Senator Stetson made his +fellow-Senators in explaining his vote to accept the report of the +Committee on Free Conference. + +"Before voting on this matter," said Stetson, "lest any one in the +future may think that I have been passed something and didn't know it, I +wish to explain my vote, and wish to say that this permission accorded a +candidate to go on record to support that candidate for United States +Senate, who shall have the endorsement of the greatest number of +districts, comes from nobody and goes to nobody. It means nothing - +mere words - idle words. The only way in which a candidate could have +been pledged would have been to provide a pledge or instructions to the +Legislature. The words 'shall be permitted' mean nothing and get +nowhere. I shall vote for this report, not because I want to, but +because I have to if we are at this session to have any Direct Primary +law at all." + + + +[57] The plain citizen will marvel at the lengths to which the machine +went to prevent a provision being incorporated into the Direct Primary +bill for the selection by State-wide vote of United States Senators. The +plain citizen does not, however, look upon a United States Senator +through the same eyes as the machine. To the plain citizen that United +States Senator is desirable who represents policies beneficial to his +country and his State; to the machine that United States Senator is +desirable who will in effect turn his Federal patronage over to the +machine. The election of United States Senators by State-wide vote would +take their appointment out of machine hands, which would mean loss to +the machine of Federal patronage. For this reason the almost +unbelievable lengths to which the machine went to prevent the provision +for State-wide vote for the election of United States Senators being +incorporated into the Direct Primary bill. + +[58] The vote was as follows: + +Ayes: Messrs. Bohnett, Callan, Cattell, Cogswell, Collum, Costar, +Flavelle, Gerdes, Gibbons, Gillis, Hinkle, Holmquist, Irwin, Johnson of +Placer, Juilliard, Kehoe, Maher, Mendenhall, Odom, Otis, Polsley, +Preston, Sackett, Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Whitney, Wilson, Wyllie and +Young - 29. + +Noes: Messrs. Barndollar, Beardslee, Beatty, Beban, Black, Butler, +Coghlan, Collier, Cronin, Cullen, Drew, Feeley, Fleisher, Flint, Greer, +Griffiths, Hammon, Hanlon, Hans, Hawk, Hewitt, Johnson of Sacramento, +Johnson of San Diego, Leeds, Macauley, McClelland, McManus, Melrose, +Moore, Mott, Nelson, Perine, Pugh, Pulcifer, Rech, Rutherford, Schmitt, +Silver, Stanton, Transue, Wagner, Wheelan - 42. + +[59] Hewitt voted against the amendments the day they were read into the +bill. + +[60] The Free Conference Committee's amendment was in full as follows: + +"By nominating petitions signed and filed as provided by existing laws +party candidates for the office of United States Senator shall have +their names placed on the official primary election ballots of their +respective parties, in the manner herein provided for State offices, +PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE VOTE FOR CANDIDATES FOR UNITED STATES +SENATORS SHALL BE AN ADVISORY VOTE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASCERTAINING THE +SENTIMENT OF THE VOTERS IN THE RESPECTIVE SENATORIAL AND ASSEMBLY +DISTRICTS IN THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES, and the Senatorial and Assembly +nominees shall be at liberty to vote either for the choice of such +district expressed at said primary election, or for the candidate for +United States Senator who shall have received the endorsement of such +primary election in the greater number of districts electing members of +his party to the Legislature." + +[61] Stetson was not the only Senator to protest. Senators Campbell, +Holohan and Miller sent to the Secretary's desk the following +explanation of their votes: "We voted for the Direct Primary bill +because it seems to be the best law that can be obtained under existing +political conditions. We are opposed to many of the features of this +bill, and believe that the people at the first opportunity will instruct +their representatives in the Legislature to radically amend the same in +many particulars, notably in regard to the election of United States +Senators, and the provisions that prevent the endorsement of a candidate +by a political party or organization other than the one that first +nominated such candidate." + +A second protest, signed by Senators Curtin, Cartwright and Sanford, was +also printed in the Journal. It reads as follows: "We voted to adopt the +report of the Committee on Free Conference on Senate Bill No. 3, not +because we believe it to be what is desired by the people of this State, +but because we believe it to be the only bill that can be adopted at +this late hour, as the Legislature is about to adjourn." + + + +Chapter XII. + +The Railroad Regulation Issue. + +Recent Increase in Freight Tariff Had Brought About a Condition Which +Required Action - Senate Divided Into Supporters of an Effective and +Supporters of an Ineffective Measure - Manipulation by Which Measures +Were Placed in Hands of a Machine-Controlled Committee. + + + +Some one has very well said that the real test of a Legislature is its +action on railroad measures. The Legislature of 1909, if estimated by +this standard would not appear to advantage. But to condemn the +Legislature of 1909 for its failure to give the State an effective +railroad regulation law, is to condemn every Legislature that has sat in +California since the present State Constitution went into effect thirty +years ago. The Constitution empowers the Legislature to pass effective +railroad regulation measures, but up to the session of 1909, the +machine, or system, or organization - one name is as fragrant as another +- had prevented the passage, if we exclude the ineffective Act of 1880, +of any railroad regulation law at all. The machine has ever moved +against the interests of the people and in the interest of its +dominating factor and at the same time its chief beneficiary, the +Southern Pacific Railroad Company. It has so manipulated the nomination +and election of Railroad Commissioners as to keep in that office men +utterly dominated by railroad influences. + +With weak and corrupt men as Railroad Commissioners, and +machine-dominated Legislatures which have neglected to pass laws which +would have made the Commission effective, or even provide funds for the +Commission to carry on its work, even had the Commissioners been so +inclined, California has been left helpless to oppose any extortion +which the railroad might see fit to exact. The system of charging all +that the traffic will bear has governed utterly. For this the Southern +Pacific Company can thank, and the People of California condemn, the +machine. + +The cost to the people has been enormous. It was pretty conclusively +shown at the Legislative investigation into the cause of recent advance +of freight rates, that upwards of $10,000,000[62] a year has in this one +instance been added to the freight charges exacted from the people of +the Pacific Coast. The added burden falls upon the Pacific Coast +manufacturer, merchant, farmer, fruit grower, consumer. All from the +highest to the lowest help pay the tribute. Thirty years is a long +period, and the arm of the railroad tribute-taker far-reaching. The vast +sums which, unrestricted, the Southern Pacific has been able to exact +run into enormous totals. From a dollar and cent standpoint, it has paid +the Southern Pacific Company to control the machine. + +But the railroad's absolute domination of the State could not continue +forever without protest that would eventually force a hearing. This +protest came toward the close of 1908. The increase in freight rates +made just before the Legislature of 1909 convened emphasized the +necessity for the enactment of a law that should galvanize the Railroad +Commission into activity; ensure the enforcement of constitutional +provisions for the protection of the public against dominant +transportation companies; in a word, provide effective railroad +regulation. + +Governor Gillett in his biennial message to the Legislature, and +Attorney General Webb in his biennial report gave expression to this +aroused public sentiment. + +General Webb, after reviewing railroad conditions in California, on page +13 of his report says: "It is thus apparent that the shippers of the +State are practically helpless." + +"I believe," continues the Attorney General, "that this review of the +situation will show the imperative necessity of prompt legislation on +this subject, and under the Constitution of this State, the Legislature +has ample authority to enact the required legislation." + +Governor Gillett, in his biennial message, takes practically the same +stand as does Attorney General Webb. + +"Our State," says the Governor on page 12 of his message, "has not kept +pace with the majority of the States of the Union in the enactment of +laws regulating railroads in their business as common carriers." + +"I can virtually promise you," said General Webb at a meeting of the +Senate Committee on Corporations, held on the evening of January 25th, +"that in the event of this (the Stetson Railroad Regulation bill) +becoming a law, and the Railroad Commission refusing or neglecting to +act under its provisions, the Governor will call the Legislature +together in extraordinary session for their impeachment."[63] + +There was no question of the aroused public sentiment in favor of the +passage of a railroad regulation measure. Even before the Legislature +convened it became evident that some sort of a measure would have to be +passed; even the railroad lobby saw that. The Legislature accordingly +divided on the question. As the fight was carried on in the Senate - the +Assembly in the rush of the closing hours of the session merely putting +its "O. K." on what the Senate had done - the division in the Senate +alone will be considered. The division in that body was: + +(1) The minority, made up of the out and out machine Republicans and +Democrats, who were prepared to pass a measure which under the name +railroad regulation would leave the railroads practically independent of +effective State supervision. + +(2) The majority, which stood for the passage of an effective law. + +The minority had the best captains in the Senate and was backed by the +machine lobby made up principally of Southern Pacific attorneys. + +The majority was poor in generals. But it had the backing of the +shippers of - the State, who sent able counsel to Sacramento to present +the shippers' side. + +And in the end the machine minority wore out and defeated the majority. +A comparatively effective railroad regulation bill was rejected and an +ineffective measure passed. + +Three railroad regulation measures were introduced in the Senate, their +authors being Campbell, Stetson, and Wright. + +The Campbell bill had much to commend it, but was rejected without much +consideration by either side. Campbell was not in the program of either +railroad or shippers. But before the session was over Campbell had made +himself felt. He had, too, introduced a Constitutional Amendment for the +correction of railroad abuses, which was to figure later on, but his +bill was scarcely considered. The attorney for the shippers, in speaking +before the Senate Committee on Corporations, confessed that he had not +read the Campbell bill. + +The attorney for the Southern Pacific Company, however, attempted to +split the anti-machine forces by praising the Campbell bill, and setting +the anti-machine Senators to disputing over the relative merits of the +Campbell and Stetson bills. But nothing came of this graceful little +coup. Campbell and his followers were too sensible to be caught by any +such trickery. They gave their loyal support to the Stetson bill, and +the Campbell bill was allowed to die in the Senate Judiciary Committee. +This narrowed the fight down to the Stetson bill and the Wright bill. + +The Stetson bill had been prepared in the office of Attorney General +Webb, and at the instigation of Governor Gillett. As originally +introduced it contained certain defects, which were afterwards +corrected, but such Senators as Cutten, Caminetti, Black, Campbell, +Miller, Cartwright, Bell and Thompson, admitted that the measure could +be made the basis of as effective a law as could be prepared under the +present constitutional provisions for the regulation of transportation +companies. + +The original measure was particularly weak in the section providing for +demurrage charges. This was finally corrected by the passage of a +separate reciprocal demurrage bill, which had been introduced by Miller. +Another weakness in the Stetson bill as originally introduced was that +the Railroad Commission was made a sort of barrier between the Courts +and those who had grievances against the transportation companies. This +objection was corrected by amendments. + +Numerous other amendments adopted from time to time made the Stetson +bill probably as effective as a California railroad regulation law can +be made, under the Constitutional provision which places extraordinary +powers in the hands of the State Board of Railroad Commissioners. + +Just where the Wright bill originated nobody seems to know for +certainty. But Senator Wright introduced it. Senator Wright was well +selected for the job. For two years he had been groomed as the reformer +who would introduce the State-saving Direct Primary Bill. So a railroad +regulation measure introduced by Senator Wright might at least be +calculated to bear the stamp of respectability. + +Like the Stetson bill, the Wright bill was based on the constitutional +provisions which make the State Board of Railroad Commissioners the +center of railroad regulation in California. And here the parallel ends. + +Comparison of the two measures is not at all to the advantage of the +Wright bill. + +The Stetson bill provided fine and imprisonment as penalty for +infringement of its provisions; the Wright bill provided fine only. + +The Stetson bill had a definite anti-pass provision; the Wright bill as +originally introduced had no such provision. + +The Stetson bill authorized not only the Attorney-General, but the +District Attorney of any county of the State to proceed to enforce its +provisions; the Wright bill granted the Attorney-General alone such +authority. + +The Stetson bill required the Railroad Commissioners to meet at least +once in every two weeks; the Wright bill provided that such meetings +should be held monthly. + +The Stetson bill gave the Railroad Commissioners authority to make +physical valuation of railroad properties; the Wright bill contained no +such provision. + +The Stetson bill recognized all discriminations to be unjust; the Wright +bill provided that no interference should be instituted unless the +discriminations complained of were shown to be unjust. + +And finally, the Stetson bill provided that the State Board of Railroad +Commissioners should have power to fix absolute rates, thus insuring +stability of rate schedules, while the Wright bill provided that the +Commissioners should fix maximum rates only, thus permitting the famous +"fluidity" of schedules advocated by machine lobby and Southern Pacific +attorneys. + +The contest between the supporters of the Wright and the supporters of +the Stetson bill, finally narrowed down to the question of providing for +absolute or maximum rates. + +The provision for the maximum rate in Senator Wright's bill, authorized +the railroad regulating Commission to fix the highest charge which a +railroad may exact from a shipper. This is called the maximum rate. The +transportation company is authorized to lower the rate at will, but it +cannot charge a rate beyond the maximum as fixed by the Commission. This +leaves the railroads to fix a sliding schedule of rates, so long as they +do not exceed the maximum. It gives the railroads the advantage of that +"fluidity" of schedules, which railroad attorneys insist is necessary +for railroad prosperity. + +The maximum rate is provided in the Interstate Commerce Act, but the +Interstate Commerce Commissioners, finding it impracticable, have for +years been clamoring for Congress to authorize the fixing of absolute +rates. The cry of the Interstate Commerce Commission has been taken up +by the shipping interests, and from one end of the country to the other +there is growing demand that authority be placed somewhere to make +railroad rates, when fixed by a regulating Commission, absolute. + +The absolute rate, or the fixed rate as it is better called, which was +provided in the Stetson bill, can neither be lowered nor raised by the +railroads. Once fixed by the regulating Commission, it must remain until +the Commission grants permission for its change. The railroads cannot +lower it any more than they can raise it. + +The advantages of the absolute rate are many. In the first place, where +the absolute rate is established, there can be no discrimination, +because the rate is known, it can neither be raised nor lowered, and the +railroads have no opportunity to favor one shipper at the expense of +another. + +In the second place, the shipper is guaranteed a stability of rate +schedules which is deemed necessary for settled business conditions. The +merchant, for example, includes transportation charges in the cost price +of the goods in which he deals. But if the transportation charges on the +same class of goods are subject to frequent change, the merchant can +never tell when his competitor is to be given the advantage of a sudden +lowering in freight rates. This uncertainty unsettles business. The +merchant holds that transportation rates should be just as stable as +tariff rates. On this account, the merchant advocates fixed rates and +stability of schedules as against maximum rates and constantly shifting +schedules. + +The supporters of the Stetson bill, then, backed the shipping and +merchant classes; while the supporters of the Wright bill backed the +contentions of the transportation companies. + +The Campbell and the Stetson bills had been originally referred to the +Senate Judiciary Committee, while the Wright bill had been referred to +the Senate Committee on Corporations. For the first few weeks of the +session, no particular note had been taken of the Wright bill, attention +being centered on the amendment of the Stetson bill. + +Things were going swimmingly with the Stetson bill, when the machine +lobby awoke to the fact that something was wrong in the Senate. There +was at least some indication that the Senate would pass an effective +railroad regulation measure. + +And then, before the advocates of the Stetson measure could tell exactly +what was happening, the railroad regulation measures were taken from the +Judiciary Committee and placed in the hands of the Committee on +Corporations. + +A glance at the personnel of the two Committees at least suggests why +this was done. + +The members of the Judiciary Committee were Willis, Wolfe, Wright, +McCartney, Savage, Boynton, Anthony, Burnett, Cutten, Estudillo, +Martinelli, Roseberry, Stetson, Thompson, Curtin, Cartwright, Caminetti, +Miller, Campbell. + +The nine Senators whose names are printed in Italics, when the issue +came to vote on the floor of the Senate, voted against the Stetson bill +and for the Wright bill; nine of the ten whose names are printed in +ordinary letters voted for the Stetson bill and against the Wright bill. +The tenth, Roseberry, was absent, but when he found that the vote had +been taken, stated that had he been present he would have voted for the +Stetson bill and against the Wright bill. + +Furthermore, Estudillo, who finally voted for the Wright bill, did not +approve the measure and voted for it because he feared the absolute rate +feature of the Stetson bill to be unconstitutional. + +Thus at the time the Stetson and the Campbell bills were taken from the +Judiciary Committee, the Committee was regarded as standing: + +For the Wright bill - 8. + +Against the Wright bill - 11. + +For the Stetson bill - 11. + +Against the Stetson bill - 8. + +It was certainly not in the interest of the Stetson bill that the +measure was taken from the Judiciary Committee and sent to the Committee +on Corporations. + +A glance at the personnel of the Committee on Corporations reveals a +significant state of affairs. The Committee consisted of the following +Senators: Bates, Welch, Wright, McCartney, Burnett, Bills, Walker, +Roseberry, Finn, Miller, Kennedy. + +When the test came on the floor of the Senate, the nine of the eleven +Senators whose names are printed in italics voted for the Wright bill +and against the Stetson bill. The two members whose names are printed in +ordinary letters, voted for the Stetson bill, and against the Wright +bill. + +The line-up of the Committee on Corporations, when the measures were +taken from the Judiciary Committee and sent to the Committee on +Corporations, was then: + +For the Wright Bill - 9. + +Against the Wright Bill - 2. + +For the Stetson Bill - 2. + +Against the Stetson Bill - 9. + +The change was certainly not made in the interest of the Stetson bill. + +The incident stirred up Campbell and other anti-machine Senators to the +fighting pitch. An arrangement was made, however, by which the measures +were to be sent back to the Judiciary Committee after the Committee on +Corporations got through with them that the Judiciary Committee might +pass upon their constitutionality. The arrangement had two effects - it +silenced the unquieting protest of the anti-machine Senators, and it +delayed consideration of the bills. But, as the sequel showed, the +arrangement did not help the Stetson bill in the least. + + + +[62] The testimony was that of George J. Bradley, traffic manager of the +Merchants' and Manufacturers' Traffic Association of Sacramento. It was +as follows: + +It is estimated on conservative figures that the increase in eastbound +California products, or Pacific Coast products, I should correctly say, +which is composed of canned fruits, canned vegetables and canned salmon, +of which there are several million cases, go from the North Pacific +coast through either San Francisco or through the North Pacific coast, +the minimum being forty thousand pounds to the car, and the increase +being ten cents per hundred pounds, means forty dollars a car increase. +Now, taking the number of cars of all those products that are shipped, +it amounted to about - and leather and other products - it amounted to +about four million dollars eastbound. Now, when the question of +westbound comes out, of course, it is practically impossible for any man +to say just exactly what that increase will mean in dollars and cents, +and the only way, therefore, to arrive at it is to take the percentage +of proportion now in their westbound tariff, which is composed of about +between eight hundred and a thousand items. They have raised the rates +from 10 to 25 cents on over two hundred articles, all of which move in +quantities; in other words, the process by which the tariff has been +amended has been that in every instance where there was a commodity +moving in quantities the rate has been advanced; wherever there was no +movement and they wished to encourage a movement, they reduced the rate. +Now, you take the five transcontinental lines that operate on the +Pacific Coast, namely, the Northern Pacific and the Great Northern on +the north and the Canadian Pacific; the Southern Pacific and the Santa +Fe and the San Pedro and Los Angeles on the south, give you six trunk +lines operating on the Pacific Coast. If you will take their gross +earnings, which amount to over four hundred millions, segregate that by +allowing fifty per cent of that to passenger service, which is a very +conservative estimate, because the passenger service does not amount to +that, leaves two hundred million dollars of gross freight earnings. Take +five per cent of that for terminal business, and business is based on +terminal rates from the coast, plus the local back, because the rate, of +course, is felt everywhere, the rates to the interior points are made on +the terminal rate, plus the local back. Take five per cent of that and +their increase in every instance has been 10 per cent, and in some cases +16 2/3 and 20 per cent; but take a very liberal conservative estimate +and put it at five per cent and you have ten million dollars; now, split +that in two and take two and a half per cent of it and you have got five +millions of dollars. Now, that and your four million dollars on +eastbound freight and you have nine millions of dollars increase in +freight rates, and I believe that that is a conservative estimate. I +don't see how you could get at it any closer, because every man, it +doesn't make any difference where he is, every man that buys pays that +ten to twenty per cent increase. + +[63] Senator Caminetti on February 12 introduced a concurrent resolution +calling for the removal of the present Board of Railroad Commissioners +from office. The Committee on Corporations reported adversely, and on +March 15th the resolution was finally rejected. + + + +Chapter XIII. + +Machine Defeats the Stetson Bill. + +Southern Pacific Attorney Succeeds in Clouding the Issue - Railroad +Claquers Active in Advocating the Maximum Rate, Which Was Designated as +Little Better Than No Rate At All - No Fight Over the Bill in the +Assembly. + + + +Having succeeded in transferring the railroad regulation measures from +the Senate Judiciary Committee, the majority of whose members were +anti-machine, to the Committee on Corporations, the majority of whose +members were machine, the machine proceeded to discredit the Stetson +bill, by making it appear that the State Constitution by implication +prohibits the fixing of absolute railroad rates, and provides that the +Railroad Commissioners may fix maximum rates only. Peter F. Dunne was +brought to Sacramento to make this argument before the Senate Committee +on Corporations. + +Dunne, in his address, showed greater ability than integrity. When he +had finished, even the anti-machine members of the Committee were +completely befuddled. Walker, one of the members of the Committee who is +not a lawyer, groped in utter darkness thereafter, until he finally +stumbled into the arms of Eddie Wolfe and Frank Leavitt and Jere Burke, +when the final vote on the railroad bills was taken. It was Walker's +only stumble of the session. But for his unfortunate vote against the +Stetson bill and for the Wright bill, Walker would have made an +exceptionally clean record. + +Not only did Dunne befog the lay Senators of the Committee, he shook the +faith of men like Miller and Roseberry - both lawyers - on the +constitutionality of the absolute rate. Miller recognizes that the +absolute rate is the only practical rate; but until the end of the +session he was not prepared to say that it could be constitutionally +established. Dunne certainly did a good job. To be sure, his address was +a mass of misrepresentations, but of misrepresentations cunningly put. +He shattered the implicit faith of the anti-machine Senators in the +absolute rate. And that was what he had been sent to Sacramento to do. +The evil that Dunne did lived long after he had left the capital. + +Curiously enough, neither the term "absolute rate" nor "maximum rate" +appears in the State Constitution. + +Article XII, Section 22, of the Constitution, provides that the Railroad +Commissioners "shall have the power and it shall be their duty to +establish rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and +freight by railroad or other transportation companies." + +Further on in the same section, it is provided that "any railroad +corporation or transportation company which shall fail or refuse to +conform to such rates as shall be established by such Commissioners, or +shall charge rates in excess thereof, * * * shall be fined not exceeding +$20,000 for each offense." + +The dispute between those who stood for maximum rates - that is to say, +the members of the machine lobby, the machine Senators, the Southern +Pacific attorneys and those who wanted absolute rates - namely, the +anti-machine Senators and the attorneys representing large shipping +interests - waxed hot over the words in the above quotation which are +printed in Italics. + +The advocates of the absolute rate held, with at least apparent reason, +that the words "fail to conform to such rates" mean just what the +dictionaries say they do: That the railroad charging a rate in excess of +that fixed by the Railroad Commissioners, or a rate less than that fixed +by the Commissioners, is not conforming to the rates. Such, at least, +seems reasonable construction of a very simple phrase. + +But not so, insisted the railroad lobby. That aggregation of patriots +skimmed over the words "fail to conform to such rates," and saw only, +"or shall charge in excess thereof." Inasmuch, the pro-railroad element +held, as the Constitution says that the railroads shall not charge in +excess of the rates fixed by the Railroad Commissioners, the railroads +are at liberty to reduce the rates as fixed by the Commissioners at +will. In other words, according to the pro-railroad element, the +Constitution authorizes the fixing of maximum rates only. + +The pro-railroad claquers even went so far as to claim that the Supreme +Court has decided that the maximum rate is the only rate that can be +fixed under the State Constitution. They referred the doubtful to the +notorious decision in the Fresno passenger rate case known as the Edson +decision. + +But no question of maximum rates was involved in the Edson case. To be +sure, Chief Justice Beatty took occasion to say in his opinion in that +case that his understanding had been that the State Constitution +provides for the maximum rate. But this had no place in the decision, +was purely dictum, and is so regarded. + +Attorney-General Webb has an ingenious but very plausible explanation of +Judge Beatty's much-discussed observation. General Webb points out that +previous to the adoption of the present State Constitution - 1879 - +Justice Beatty had been engaged in the active practice of the law in +this State. Up to the time of the adoption of the Constitution of 1879 +the maximum rate had prevailed in California. About that time, Judge +Beatty went to Nevada and was absent from the State for several years. +Returning to California, after the State Constitution had been adopted, +Judge Beatty found no case in which the duties of the Railroad +Commissioners had been involved, until the Edson case came up. + +"I am of the opinion," said General Webb in discussing this point, "that +when the Chief justice spoke of the maximum rate in the Edson case he +was governed by mental impressions received previous to 1879, when the +maximum rate was indeed the rule in California." + +All this was a very pretty theory. To the common-sense mind "conform to +the rates fixed" might mean conform to them; the normal man might be +unable to dig out of the Constitution any prohibition of absolute rates. +But the confusion caused by the raising of the question got the Stetson +bill very much in the air. + +During all the discussion, however, the Wright bill was not considered +at all. Nobody was thinking of the Wright bill - that is to say, nobody +outside of those scheming for its passage. Like a mongrel duck's egg +under a respectable hen, it was left to incubate undisturbed, to +surprise everybody at the hatching. + +Finding themselves unable to clear away the doubt which raising the +question of the constitutionality of the absolute rate had created, the +anti-machine Senators and the attorneys of the shippers finally, after +the Wright bill had been forced into prominence, put the case something +like this: + +"If the Courts decide that the maximum rate only is constitutional, then +the Wright bill, which provides for the maximum rate, will be +constitutional, and the greater part of the Stetson bill will also be +constitutional. + +"But if the Courts decide that an absolute rate is the only rate +justified under the Constitution, then the Wright bill will be +unconstitutional and all the Stetson bill constitutional." + +This somewhat loose argument unquestionably kept certain Senators who +recognized the impracticability of the maximum rate, but feared for the +constitutionality of the absolute rate, in line for the Stetson bill. + +With the situation thus confused, all was in readiness to bring the +Wright bill before the public. This was done on February 17th. Up to +that date the writer honestly believes that not two minutes had been +devoted to public discussion of this measure, although the Stetson bill +had been discussed paragraph by paragraph, line by line, every word +weighed carefully. + +The ceremony of giving the Wright bill prominence took place behind the +closed doors of an executive session of the Senate Committee on +Corporations. These executive sessions, by the way, are seldom held when +the best interests of the public are to be conserved. The proceedings +were evidently pre-arranged. Senator Wright opened by moving that the +policy of the Committee should be that the Railroad Regulation measure +to receive favorable consideration from the Committee must provide for +the maximum rate. + +The vote was as prompt as it was decisive. Senator Wright's motion +carried by a vote of 7 to 3. The vote was as follows: + +For the maximum rate - Bates, Welch, Wright, McCartney, Bills, Finn, +Kennedy. + +Against the maximum rate - Walker, Roseberry, Miller. + +Burnett, the eleventh member of the Committee, was absent. + +Gradually it dawned upon Walker, Miller and Roseberry that this meant +the favorable recommendation of the Wright bill. The next moment that +fact was hammered into them by the Committee deciding by the same vote, +7 to 3, to recommend that the Stetson bill do not pass; and that the +Wright bill do pass. + +The machine had won the opening skirmish in the railroad regulation +controversy. Incidentally it had come out in the open squarely for the +Wright bill. From that moment the machine Senators labored openly for +the passage of the measure. However, the machine was not yet out of the +woods with its Railroad Regulation bill. The Senate Judiciary Committee +had still to pass upon it, and the majority of the Judiciary Committee +was anti-machine. + +Wright followed the same course in the Judiciary Committee as he had +taken in the Committee on Corporations, namely, moved that it be the +sense of the Committee that the Railroad Regulation bill to be favorably +considered by the Committee should provide for the maximum rate. + +Wright's motion was, however, lost by a vote of 8 to 10. The Committee +not only rejected the maximum rate, but endorsed the absolute rate, thus +reversing the Committee on Corporations. The vote by which this was done +was as follows: + +Against the maximum rate, against the Wright bill and for the Stetson +bill - Campbell, Cutten, Miller, Stetson, Thompson, Caminetti, Boynton, +Roseberry, Curtin and Cartwright - 10. + +For the maximum rate, for the Wright bill and against the Stetson bill - +Anthony, Martinelli, McCartney, Wright, Willis, Wolfe, Burnett and +Estudillo - 8. + +Absent - Savage - 1. + +Thus the Stetson bill after two months of machine effort against it, +went to the floor of the Senate from the Judiciary Committee with the +recommendation that it "do pass." Of the forty Senators, nineteen were +lawyers, and every one of the nineteen was a member of the Senate +Judiciary Committee. Thus the majority of the lawyers of the Senate, in +spite of the confusion which the machine claquers had created, were +willing to take their chances on the constitutionality of the Stetson +bill. + +But in fairness it must be admitted that members of the Judiciary +Committee who voted for the absolute rate provision of the Stetson bill +were still in the befuddled condition in which Peter F. Dunne's +sophistry had left them. Senator Miller, for example, in explaining his +vote for the absolute rate, said: + +"I take this stand, not that I am convinced that the Supreme Court will +decide the absolute rate to be constitutional; I fear that it may not. +But the maximum rate is little better than no rate at all. I wish the +absolute rate provided in this bill, that the Supreme Court may be given +opportunity to pass upon it." + +Senator Roseberry, who voted for the absolute rate, confessed himself as +much at sea as was Senator Miller. Senator Estudillo, who voted for the +maximum rate, insisted that he had not been able to make up his mind +which should be adopted. + +On the other hand, Senator Cutten, himself a lawyer and a close student +of the legal questions involved, stated that while he had thought +originally that the maximum rate is the only constitutional rate that +can be fixed, he had been forced to come to the conclusion that the +absolute rate alone is constitutional. + +But in the end the Wright bill and not the Stetson bill passed the +Senate. It passed after a day of debate in which the issue became +clouded, if anything, worse than at any stage of the proceedings. +Leavitt and Wolfe, with Wright chipping in with a me-too word now and +then, led the debate in favor of the Wright bill. Senators Stetson, +Boynton, Cutten, Roseberry and Miller led the fight for the Stetson +bill. Significant enough was the fact that the line-up of Senate leaders +was precisely the same as that in the fight which the machine carried on +against the Direct Primary bill. + +Miller's argument in favor of the Stetson bill showed the confusion +under which the advocates of effective railroad regulation were +laboring: + +"If we adopt the Wright bill," said Miller, "the railroads will be +satisfied and never dispute it in the Courts. Whereas, by the adoption +of the Stetson bill the railroads will almost be compelled to appeal to +the Courts, and then we shall have a quick decision on the question in +which we are all interested. If the Courts sustain the Stetson bill, we +shall have a law that will do all we want for the present."[64] + +The debate on the measures was on a motion by Stetson that the Stetson +bill be substituted for the Wright bill. In this Stetson made a serious +mistake. He staked his whole bill on one issue, that of absolute or +maximum rates. On all other points, the Stetson bill was better than the +Wright bill. It was a mistake in policy for Stetson to stake the fate of +his measure on a single issue. + +Stetson's motion was lost by a vote of 16 to 22; the Stetson bill was +accordingly not substituted for the Wright bill, and the Wright bill, +which had come from the Judiciary Committee with a minority report back +of it, went to third reading and final passage. + +The vote by which Stetson's motion was defeated, was as follows: + +To substitute the Stetson bill for the Wright bill - Bell, Birdsall, +Black, Boynton, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, +Holohan, Lewis, Miller, Sanford, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson - 16. + +Against substituting the Stetson bill for the Wright bill - Anthony, +Bates, Bills, Burnett, Estudillo, Finn, Hare, Hartman, Hurd, Kennedy, +Leavitt, Martinelli, McCartney, Price, Reily, Savage, Walker, Weed, +Welch, Willis, Wolfe, Wright - 22. + +Senators Roseberry and Rush were absent from the room when the vote was +taken but both were for the Stetson bill, which would have made the vote +22 to 18 in favor of the Wright bill. + +The twenty Senators whose names are printed in Italics are the twenty +who voted with Leavitt and Wolfe to maintain the deadlock on the Direct +Primary bill that the measure might be so amended that the electors of +California would be denied a practical, State-wide vote for United +States Senators. But one of the twenty, Lewis, voted for the Stetson +bill, while nineteen of them voted for the Wright bill. + +On the other hand, only three of the Senators, Estudillo, Anthony and +Walker, who stood out for an honest Direct Primary law, voted against +the Stetson bill and for the Wright bill. Walker had supported the +Stetson bill in the Committee on Corporations, but stumbled into the +machine ranks when it came to final vote. Had the anti-machine had an +organization, such as the machine Democrats and Republicans maintained, +Walker's blunder could have been prevented. Probably, too, Estudillo and +Anthony would have remained with the anti-machine forces[65]. This would +have given the Stetson bill twenty-one votes, and assured its passage. + +Another vote that should have been saved to the reformers was that of +Burnett. Burnett was clearly tricked into voting for the Wright bill. +When the Stetson bill received the favorable recommendation of the +Senate Judiciary Committee, machine claquers filled the air with the +indefinite promise that in the event of the Wright bill becoming a law, +a constitutional amendment would be adopted, by which all ambiguity in +the State Constitution on the question of maximum and absolute rates +would be removed. The amendment was then pending before the Senate +Judiciary Committee, which finally reported it favorably. + +After the Wright bill had been passed, the amendment was defeated by +machine votes, as will be shown in the next chapter. + +In the closing days of the session, when Burnett was urging that steps +be taken for investigation into the increase of freight rates, he called +attention to the fate of that railroad-regulation amendment. + +"I was led to vote as I did for the Railroad Regulation bill," he said, +"on the understanding that that constitutional amendment would be +adopted. As you know, it was defeated. My attitude on the regulation +bill would have been very different had I known that the amendment was +to be rejected." + +The Wright bill met with practically no opposition in the Assembly, +being rushed through the Lower House in the closing hours of the +session. Had the Stetson bill passed the Senate, the machine would have +tried to block and amend it in the Assembly as was done with the Direct +Primary bill, but the measure would probably have been passed. + +Had the anti-machine forces in the Senate been organized, the Stetson, +and not the Wright bill, would have passed that body. Without +organization, or even definite policy, in the face of organized machine +opposition, it is astonishing - and at the same time most encouraging - +that eighteen of the forty Senators stood by the Stetson bill to the +end. + + + +[64] The question to which Senator Miller referred was: Has the +Legislature power under the Constitution to authorize the Railroad +Commissioners to fix the absolute rate? a question upon which the +machine does not propose the Supreme Court shall be required to pass. + +[65] Walker and Estudillo were bitterly condemned for their vote for the +Wright bill. Incidentally, the writer has been roundly criticized for +offering the excuse in their behalf that these two men indicated by +their attitude on other measures throughout the session that they would +have continued with the reform element in the matter of railroad +regulation, had the anti-machine Senators been organized to give +effective resistance to the machine. Perhaps the sanest of this +criticism, certainly the most reasonable, is from a gentleman who was a +close observer of the work of the session. He says: + +"The course of the railroad rate bill from my point of view looked +somewhat different in many details, at any rate, from your account of +it. I cannot bring myself to think that it was defeated by any chance at +the hands of a friendly Legislature. I think that what chances there +were were mostly added to the number of votes the bill got and that the +attitude of men like Walker and Estudillo on that bill was fundamental +and to have been expected from the start. Of course what you say about +the woeful lack of organization amongst the individual men was only too +apparent. That phenomenon reaches back still deeper and is based upon +the quality of human nature which exerts itself more persistently and +more energetically and with soldier-like rhythm of compact organization +when private selfish interests are involved, than when the general +interest and somewhat vague uncentered end of public welfare is +concerned." + +But in spite of this very reasonable view, from a very reasonable +gentleman, the fact remains that in the Committee on Corporations, +Walker stood out against the machine on this very issue, and that in the +direct primary fight both Walker and Estudillo stood out against the +machine to the end. Had the anti-machine element been organized, the +Stetson bill and not the Wright bill would in all probability have been +passed. + + + +Chapter XIV. + +Railroad Measures. + +Constitutional Amendment to Clear the Way for an Effective Railroad +Regulation Bill Defeated - Rate Investigation Delayed Until Too Late for +Effectiveness - Resolution to Continue Investigation Defeated - +Reciprocal Demurrage Bill Becomes a Law - "Error" in the Full Crew Bill. + + + +The anti-machine members of the Legislature had not proceeded far in +their efforts to pass an effective railroad regulation law, before they +became convinced that at best only a make-shift measure is possible, +until certain alleged ambiguities of those sections of the State +Constitution prescribing the powers and duties of the State Board of +Railroad Commissioners have been removed. Where, to the common sense +mind, no ambiguities exist, machine claquers and Southern Pacific +attorneys can read them into the Constitution very easily, as in the +dispute as to whether the absolute or the minimum rate is +constitutional. + +Advised by the attorneys representing the shipping interests, the +anti-machine members undertook to simplify the language of the sections +in dispute, so that a wayfaring man though a Judge on the bench or a +machine legislator need not err in the construction thereof. + +Early in the session, Senator Campbell had introduced a constitutional +amendment to that end. The amendment went to the Judiciary Committee on +January 14th. The majority of the committee, openly against the machine, +favored the submission to the people of such an amendment. But it was +not until February 22d that the amendment - or rather a substitute for +it - was reported back to the Senate. + +The day following, February 23d, Senator Campbell had the measure +re-referred to the committee, that an amendment better calculated to +meet the needs of the State might be prepared. The committee took until +March 5th to make its report. The anti-machine Senators on the committee +had to fight for every inch of the way toward securing a report upon an +effective amendment. This, however, they finally succeeded in doing. The +second substitute amendment smoothed out the ambiguities and the alleged +ambiguities of the Constitution, of which the machine legislators made +so much during the session, and of which it is feared the courts may +make much later on. For the long list of constitutional powers and +duties of the Railroad Commissioners, which are so worded as to confuse +the legal mind, the framers of the amendment substituted the following: + +"The Commission (Railroad) and each of its members shall have such +powers and perform such duties as are now or may hereafter be provided +for by law." Under that simple permission there could have been no +question of the authority of the Legislature to empower the Railroad +Commissioners to fix a system of absolute rates. Section 23, Article +XII., of the Constitution, which at least confused the lawyers employed +by the railroads to prevent the passage of the Stetson bill, was +repealed entirely. The adoption of the amendment, would, had it been +approved by the people at the general election of 1910, have removed +every impediment which railroad attorneys claim to be in the way of an +effective railroad regulation law for California. + +Curiously enough the machine Senators who had been so much exercised +over the alleged ambiguities of the Constitution when the Stetson bill +was under consideration were found opposed to the submission of the +amendment to the people. Every Senator who voted against the amendment +had voted against the Stetson bill and had voted for the Wright bill. +Burnett, who had been led to believe when he voted for the Wright bill +that the amendment would be submitted to the people, voted for the +amendment. Walker also switched back from the machine. Wright and +McCartney, who had voted against the Stetson bill, also went on record +for the amendment. The remaining fourteen Senators who voted for it, to +a man, had voted for the Stetson bill and against the passage of the +Wright bill. But a two-thirds vote of the Senate was required for the +amendment's adoption. This meant twenty-seven votes. The amendment was +defeated, the vote being nineteen for submission of the measure to the +people, and sixteen against[66]. + +This ended all hope of a model railroad regulation law for California +until 1913, for the Constitution must be amended before such a law can +be realized. If a satisfactory amendment be adopted in 1911, it must +before going into effect be ratified by the people. This ratification +would come in 1912. The Legislature of 1913 would then be able to +proceed with the passage of the model statute. + +An attempt to investigate the causes and the necessity of the arbitrary +increase in transcontinental freight rates failed as completely as did +the attempted amendment of the Constitution. + +Early in the session, on January 18, to be exact, Senator Caminetti +introduced a resolution which directed the Senate Committee on Federal +Relations to inquire into the cause of the increase in freight rates, +and to report its findings to the Senate. Two days later Caminetti +introduced a second and companion resolution, which provided that +investigation should be made into the causes for the increase in express +charges. On Senator Leavitt's motion this last resolution was made a +special order for January 22, when the first resolution was to come up. +The Senate on the 22d re-referred the resolutions back to the committee. + +The Senate Committee on Federal Relations was, by Caminetti's clever; +tactics in having the resolutions go to that body, forced into a +prominence which evidently worried the machine. It consisted of Burnett, +Black and Sanford. Black, Republican, and Sanford, Democrat, were +working openly against the machine. Burnett, while he managed to land on +the machine side of things at critical points in the progress of the +session, was by no means a machine coolie. Had it been known that the +Committee on Federal Relations was to be charged with an investigation +into railroad affairs, a very different committee would unquestionably +have been appointed. The machine's problem was to correct the blunder +made when the anti-machine forces were given a majority on what had +become a committee charged with the handling of an important railroad +issue. The ease with which the blunder was corrected speaks volumes for +the machine's resourcefulness. + +The air at the capitol suddenly became permeated with the idea that a +committee of three was altogether too small to conduct so important an +investigation as that proposed in the Caminetti resolutions. Accordingly +the Committee on Federal Relations very readily recommended, when it +reported the resolutions back to the Senate with the recommendation that +the investigation be held, that two Senators be added to the committee, +making it a committee of five. Had the machine observed the unwritten +rules of Senatorial courtesy[67], which machine Senators insist upon so +loudly, the anti-machine element would have been safe enough in doing +this. Senatorial courtesy required that the author of the resolutions, +Caminetti, be made one of the two additional members. This would have +given the anti-machine element at least three members of the enlarged +committee, a condition which did not line with machine purposes at all. +So Senatorial courtesy was thrown to the winds, Senator Caminetti was +ignored, and Senators Wolfe and Bills were named as the additional +members of the committee. The machine seldom blunders, but when it does, +usually covers its blunders with astonishing directness and dispatch. A +glance at the records made by Senators Wolfe and Bills, which will be +found in Table "A" of the Appendix, will show the truth of this +statement. + +The machine's next move was to delay the investigation. For one reason +and another the investigation was delayed. Finally, on February 19, +Caminetti gave notice that on the following Tuesday, he would move that +the committee be discharged and a second committee ordered to carry out +the instructions contained in the resolutions. This declaration of war +stirred the machine to action - machine action. Assurances were given +that the investigation would be held, but it was March 12, almost two +months after the resolution had been introduced, and only twelve days +before adjournment, before the committee placed its first witness on the +stand. + +At that time the Senate was in the midst of the Direct Primary fight, +and in addition, the machine after months of planning was sending +literally hundreds of measures into Senate and Assembly for final +action. There was no time nor were the members of the committee in a +condition to conduct the investigation which the anti-machine element +had contemplated. But hurried hearings were held, and a mass of evidence +of railroad and express company extortion brought into the open. The +interested reader will find the testimony printed in the Senate journal +of March 23, 1909. + +Men of the standing of Edwin Bonnheim[68], treasurer and manager of +Weinstock, Lubin & Co.; Russell D. Carpenter, auditor of Hale Brothers, +Inc.; J. O. Bracken, manager of the California Commercial Association; +C. H. Bentley of the California Fruit Canners Association; all testified +that the increase in express and freight charges has worked great +hardship upon the State. They showed that in the final analysis the +consumer pays the increased charges. Furthermore, testimony was produced +which at least indicated that the transportation companies, if +economically not to say honestly managed, would receive fair returns on +their legitimate investments, were even lower freight rates to be +charged than those exacted prior to the increase of 1908. It was also +shown that the State of California could institute and conduct an +examination into railroad affairs before the Interstate Commerce +Commission[69]. It was clear to all that thorough investigation under +the Caminetti resolutions would prove of enormous benefit to the State. +That the committee could do little or nothing in the short time +remaining before adjournment was also recognized. Burnett had come out +for thorough investigation, giving the anti-machine forces a majority of +the committee. Witness after witness representing the large shippers and +importers of the State urged that the investigation be carried on even +after the Legislature had adjourned. Burnett as chairman of the +committee was urging this course, but it was March 23, the day before +adjournment, before he could get his committee report ready, and filed +with the Senate, as basis for a resolution to continue the investigation +after the Legislature had adjourned. There were but eleven dependable +anti-machine Senators in addition to Burnett who were within reach of +the capitol. But the machine had a safe majority within call. Burnett's +resolution was defeated, the investigation denied, by a vote of twelve +for to sixteen against[70]. + +But two important railroad measures were finally passed by the +Legislature. The first of these was the "Full Crew bill," which required +adequate manning of railroad trains. After being held-up as long as the +machine dared, the bill was finally passed. But the "Full Crew bill" met +with one of those unfortunate "errors"[71] which played such important +parts in the passage of the Anti-Gambling bill and the Direct Primary +bill. When the Legislature had adjourned this error was discovered, and +Governor Gillett refused to sign the bill because of it. + +The second important railroad measure passed was the Reciprocal +Demurrage bill, introduced in the Senate by Miller, and in the Assembly +by Drew. As finally passed the bill provides that railroad companies +which fail to supply shippers with cars when proper requisition has been +made for them, shall pay the injured shipper demurrage at the rate of $5 +per car per day. On the other hand, shippers who fail to load or unload +cars after a stated time, are required to pay the railroad $6 daily as +demurrage. The extra dollar which the shippers are required to pay the +railroads is exacted to compensate the railroads for rental of the car. + +Similar laws up to the time of the passage of the Miller-Drew bill had +been adopted by seventeen States of the Union, including Oregon and +Texas. During the recent car shortage, it is alleged that empty cars +needed in California, were sent into Oregon and into Texas, that the +railroads might escape the demurrage charges exacted in those two +States. California, without a demurrage law, was helpless. At the +session of 1907, however, the machine, in complete control of the +Senate, defeated a reciprocal demurrage bill. To be sure the demurrage +was higher in the measure proposed in 1907 than in that passed at the +session of 1909, but it was the principle of demurrage, not its amount, +that the machine was against in 1907. In 1909, however, not a Senator +voted against the bill. And in this connection there is a story told +which unquestionably had its bearing upon the fate of the Reciprocal +Demurrage bill at the 1909 session. The story deals with a political +adventure in the life of one Henry Lynch. + +Mr. Lynch voted against reciprocal demurrage in 1907. He voted neither +for nor against reciprocal demurrage in 1909, for he was not at +Sacramento to vote. Mr. Lynch was not at Sacramento to vote in 1909, for +one reason at least, because he did vote against reciprocal demurrage in +1907. + +Mr. Lynch hailed from the Thirty-first Senatorial District, which takes +in San Benito and San Luis Obispo counties. These counties are intensely +Republican; they are also farming communities. And since the one-time +Senator Lynch voted against the Reciprocal Demurrage bill, the farmers +have seen tons upon tons of their products rot in the fields because +they could not get cars to move their crops. + +But while the farmers of San Luis Obispo and San Benito counties were +watching their products rot for want of cars to move them, it is alleged +that cars were being sent from California to Oregon to meet the +requisitions of Oregon shippers. Oregon had a reciprocal demurrage law +on her statute books; California had not. + +Senator Lynch's vote against the Reciprocal Demurrage bill was made a +sort of issue in San Benito and San Luis Obispo counties at the election +of 1908. A. E. Campbell, Democrat, was running against Mr. Lynch, +Republican, for the State Senate. Right or wrong - the reader may judge +which - the farmers of the two counties credited the defeat of the +Reciprocal Demurrage bill not to the Republican Party, but to the +Republican machine, or better described perhaps as the +Republican-Democratic machine, that dominates the State, a machine +which the people of California are just now engaged in smashing. + +Being good Republicans, the people of Mr. Lynch's district gave Mr. Taft +a plurality of more than 1,700; remembering the defeat of the Reciprocal +Demurrage bill, they gave Mr. Campbell, Democratic candidate for the +Senate, a plurality of 416. The fact that a United States Senator was to +be elected didn't influence the Republicans of San Luis Obispo County at +all. They elected a Democrat to the State Senate because they knew him +to be free from machine domination - a machine maintained for the +purpose of defeating good measures, such as the Reciprocal Demurrage +bill, and furthering the passage of bad ones. + +But the influence of Lynch's vote against the Reciprocal Demurrage bill +was not confined to San Luis Obispo and San Benito Counties. It spread +over into the adjoining Twenty-ninth District, which takes in Santa Cruz +and San Mateo Counties. These counties are also intensely Republican. +They gave Taft a plurality of 2,799. But they gave the Democratic +candidate for the State Senate, James B. Holohan, a plurality of 677. +Holohan ran 3,476 votes ahead of his ticket in a district where only +9,483 votes were cast for State Senator. Holohan was known to be free of +machine influences. He could be counted upon to vote for a Reciprocal +Demurrage bill without first consulting the Southern Pacific's political +agent, Jere Burke. And the Republican whose place he took in the Senate +had voted against the Reciprocal Demurrage bill of 1907. + +The election of Holohan and Campbell unquestionably had its influence on +the passage of the Demurrage, bill. Not a member of the Senate cast his +vote against it, although several of the Senators who had voted against +the bill two years before, sat in the Senate of 1909. Among these were +ten Senators who, during the session of 1909, were conspicuously on the +wrong side of most questions. They were Senators Bates, Hartman, +Leavitt, McCartney, Reily, Savage, Weed, Willis, Wolfe and Wright. The +ten, for example, constituted half the twenty Senators who opposed the +plan to give The People State-wide popular vote in the selection of +United States Senators. Only seven Senators voted against the +Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. Five of the seven - Hartman, Leavitt, +Reily, Weed and Wolfe - had voted against reciprocal demurrage in 1907. +But there was a harkening to the demand of The People in 1909, which had +been wanting two years before. Seven of these ten Senators, who voted +against reciprocal demurrage in 1907 - Bates, Hartman, McCartney, +Savage, Willis, Wolfe and Wright - voted for reciprocal demurrage in +1909. Three of them - Leavitt, Reily and Weed - did not vote at all. + + + +[66] The vote was as follows: + +For the amendment: Bell, Birdsall, Boynton, Burnett, Caminetti, +Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, Holohan, McCartney, Miller, +Roseberry, Rush, Strobridge, Sanford, Thompson, Walker, Wright - 19. + +Against the amendment: Anthony, Bills, Estudillo, Finn, Hartman, Hurd, +Kennedy, Leavitt, Lewis, Price, Reily, Savage, Weed, Welch, Willis, +Wolfe - 16. + +[67] Machine Senators habitually exact the utmost consideration and +courtesy from the anti-machine Senators, and habitually repay it with +deceit and trickery. The curious feature of this is that the +anti-machine Senators continue to extend the courtesy and continue to be +tricked and imposed upon. A shutting off of "Senatorial courtesy" would +go far toward solving the problem of machine domination of the +Legislature. + +[68] Mr. Bonnheim testified that prior to the new schedule of express +rates enforced between New York and the city of San Francisco, the rate +was $8.00 per hundred for shipments of from 10,000 to 20,000 pounds; +$9.00 per hundred for 5,000 to 10,000 pounds; $10.00 per hundred for +2,000 to 5,000 pounds; $11.00 per hundred from 1,000 to 2,000 pounds. +and $12.00 from 500 to 1,000 pounds; $13.50 from 100 to 500 pounds. + +That the withdrawal of the bulk rates in December, 1908, resulted in an +advance of 35 per cent by the withdrawal of the 2,000 pound rate, and an +advance of 50 per cent by the withdrawal of the 5,000 pound rate; an +advance of 66 3/4 per cent by the withdrawal of the 10,000 pound rate, +and that the withdrawal of the 20,000 pound rate amounted to an advance +of 92 8/10 per cent. + +[69] Senator Cartwright actually introduced a resolution calling upon +the Attorney-General to institute proceedings before the Interstate +Commerce Commission: + +To determine whether existing rates are reasonable or unreasonable. + +To ascertain, fix and establish a reasonable schedule of freight rates, +and to enforce the same. + +To determine whether or not any existing rate is discriminatory. + +And to prevent further discrimination between persons or places. + +The resolution carried an appropriation of $25,000 to ensure competent +legal and expert assistance. + +The resolution was introduced on February 4. It went first to the +Committee on Federal Relations, then to the Judiciary Committee, then to +the Committee on Finance, from which it emerged March 1 with the +recommendation that it be adopted. On March 2 it was sent back to the +Committee on Finance and was never heard from again. The enormous +benefit to the State if such an investigation could be honestly and +effectively carried on, will be recognized. + +[70] The vote was as follows: + +For the resolution: Bell, Birdsall, Boynton, Burnett, Caminetti, Cutten, +Estudillo, Holohan, Roseberry, Rush, Sanford, Thompson - 12. + +Against the resolution: Anthony, Bates, Bills, Finn, Hartman, Hurd, +Kennedy, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, Reily, Savage, Weed, Willis, Wolfe, +Wright - 16. + +[71] E. F. Mitchell, Executive Secretary to Governor Gillett, makes the +following statement regarding this particular error: + +The electric companies which run interurban trains, also claimed that +the bill, as prepared, applied to them, and would place upon them an +unnecessary burden and expense. + +"There is no doubt that section three of the act applies to motor cars +and electric cars. The language is very plain. Section one of the bill +describes passenger trains, section two refers to freight trains, and +section three says "all other trains not propelled by steam +locomotives." Now, there are only two classes of cars that are not +propelled by steam locomotives, and those are motor and electric cars. +In the Governor's opinion, an error was made in endeavoring to amend it, +so it would not apply to motor cars and electric cars. The amendment was +prepared, and we had here in the office, during the argument on the +bill, the original committee amendments proposed. The amendment was to +be made after the word "train" on the second line and had this amendment +been made as contemplated, it would have excluded motor cars and +electric cars, but instead of having been made on line two, as expected, +it was carried into line three, where it gave the bill an entirely +different meaning, It was one of those unfortunate things that crept +into legislation through an oversight of somebody, which could have been +readily corrected if the bill had been watched. The insertion of this +amendment in the wrong place, instead of excluding motor cars and +electric cars, as intended, included them. This error was not discovered +until the bill came up before the Governor for consideration." + + + +Chapter XV. + +Defeat of the Commonwealth Club Bills. + +Drawn By Committees of the Ablest San Francisco Attorneys Not Under +Retainer of Prison-Dodging Captains of Industry - Measures Not Allowed +to Reach Senate or Assembly, but Killed in Committees - Grove L. +Johnson's Keen Opposition. + + + +The graft prosecution at San Francisco not only brought the fact +squarely before the public that large corporations sometimes catch the +easiest way to achieve their purposes by bribing public officials, but +that it is a deal easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle +than a millionaire offender through the legal cobwebs of technicality to +a cell at San Quentin or Folsom[72]. + +That the technical defense in criminal cases was subject to grave abuses +had been generally recognized. But it took the graft cases at San +Francisco to fairly rub this unpleasant fact into the law-abiding +element. Because for the first time in the practice of criminal law in +California, unlimited wealth was available to employ the best legal +talent to defend men under indictment. + +The defending lawyers took advantage of every technicality. They +emphasized the most trivial of them. Gradually it began to dawn upon The +People that here were legal refuges, based upon the most absurd of +technicalities, the sweeping away of which would in no way injure the +substantial rights of a person charged with crime, refuges which were +available to the rich man but denied to the poor or moderately +well-to-do. + +To be sure, any person accused could make his technical defense if he +had the means to employ the necessary counsel. But in face of the +astonishing performances going on in the courts at San Francisco, it +soon became apparent to the thoughtful, that no man, whose fortune was +expressed in terms of less than five ciphers could make such a defense. + +Thus the unpalatable truth was forced home, that we have in California a +technical defense available for the rich man charged with crime, which +is in effect denied even those of the so-called middle classes. + +With this conviction came demand of reform of the criminal laws to +ensure: + +(1) A prompt trial of an accused person on the merits of the case. + +(2) A prompt judgment in the case of a verdict of guilty. + +(3) A prompt hearing of the case in the Court of Appeal. + +The machine was, of course, against any such "wicked innovations," as +Assemblyman Grove L. Johnson would have called them. + +However, at San Francisco, three considerable bodies, the Bar +Association, the Commonwealth Club and the Citizens' League of Justice, +took the matter up, and for months had the ablest lawyers of the State - +at any rate the ablest not retained for the defense of capitalists under +indictment - at work wrestling with the problem of simplifying the +criminal codes and doing away so far as possible with technical defense, +except in such cases as the substantial rights of the defendant might be +involved. + +A committee consisting of J. C. McKinstry, J. J. Dwyer, Lester H. +Jacobs, Oscar Cushing and Warren Olney Jr. was appointed for this +purpose by the Citizens' League of Justice. The Commonwealth Club +appointed Beverly L. Hodghead, Orrin K. McMurray, Alex. G. Eells, +Fairfax H. Wheelan, Sidney V. Smith, Lester H. Jacobs and Joseph +Hutchinson. One would go far before finding more representative or more +public-spirited bodies of citizens, or more able exponents of the law. + +The labors of the several committees resulted in what may in a broad way +be regarded as two sets of bills being prepared. + +The first, known as the Commonwealth Club bills, were sixty-five in +number, and were introduced in the Senate by Campbell, and in the +Assembly by Butler. The second set was known as the Bar Association +bills. They were introduced in the Senate by Burnett. They were nine in +number, and while apparently covering much of the ground of the +Commonwealth Club bills, were in no respects so complete as to method or +detail. The Bar Association bills pin-pricked an abuse; the Commonwealth +Club bills drove the knife in deep. + +The sixty-five Commonwealth Club bills were readily divided into three +groups, those dealing with Grand Juries and indictments, with trial +juries and verdicts, and with appeals to the higher courts. + +The general purpose of the measures dealing with Grand Juries was to +make those bodies purely accusatory, to make their findings conclusive +and not subject to attack. The basis of the proposed amendments and +additions to the laws governing Grand Juries was that Grand Juries are +primarily required to investigate secret offenses, and should be +regarded as purely accusatory bodies. On this theory the Commonwealth +Club bills made the indictment of a Grand Jury as binding as the action +of a committing magistrate who holds a defendant to answer. Had the +Commonwealth Club bills become laws there would have been no more +placing of Grand Jurors on trial for having found indictments against +persons able to employ crafty criminal lawyers. + +But lest the defendant under investigation might be wronged, the +Commonwealth Club measures so amended the codes that a Grand Juror in +any way biased against the defendant was required to absent himself from +the Grand Jury room when the defendant's case was under consideration. +Under the proposed laws each Grand Juror was required to take oath "not +to participate in the inquiry as to any matter or affecting any person +as to which or whom he is biased or could not vote freely either way +that the evidence presented would in justice require him to vote." + +The Commonwealth Club amendments regarding trial juries dealt with the +problem in the same broad spirit. The chief object sought was to avoid +the trying of citizens called for jury service[73]. The proposed laws +obviated this by leaving it with the Judge to determine the +qualifications of the juror, that is to say, the examination of jurors +in criminal cases was to have been taken out of the hands of the lawyers +and required of the Judge. To compensate the defendant for whatever +substantial disadvantage he might suffer, the number of his peremptory +challenges was materially increased. + +To prevent the setting aside of judgments on trifling technicalities, +the proposed amendments provided that the Judge should fix the legality +of the jury panel by general order, after which challenges could not +apply to the whole panel, although they still held as to individual +jurors. + +One of the most important of the provisions regarding trial jurors was +that the reading of mere newspaper reports of a case should not +disqualify a trial juror, unless it were shown that the newspaper +article purported to be a true copy of the official testimony. + +The fact that under the present law the term "reasonable doubt" is not +given legal definition paves the way for frequent miscarriages of +justice. The Judge is required to define the term for the jury. The +defendant may take exception to the definition, thus paving the way for +technical defense in the upper Courts. The Commonwealth Club bills +defined "reasonable doubt" to be, "that state of the case which, after +the entire comparison and consideration of all the evidence in the +cause, leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot +say they feel an abiding conviction to a moral certainty of the truth of +the charge." + +Amendments were also proposed to the law governing instructions to +juries. Under the present rule, each side presents a long list of +instructions for the Judge to give to the jury. If the Judge refuse to +give the instructions as requested, objections to his refusal can be +taken and made basis for a technical defense[73a]. Under the proposed +amendments objection could be made only to such instructions as were +given, not to those which were not presented to the jury. + +In none of those proposed amendments could the substantial rights of the +defendant be said to be encroached upon. But the proposed laws did clear +away a mass of technicalities which has kept many a scamp out of jail. + +The proposed amendments dealing with appeals in criminal cases aimed at +prompt judgment and sentence after conviction, prompt appeal and +conclusion of the case. + +To this end, the measures provided that upon conviction the defendant +must be sentenced forthwith, and if appeals were taken, taken on the +judgment. Instead of the cumbersome bill of exceptions, which required +weeks and sometimes months to prepare, it was provided that the entire +testimony given at the trial, together with the complete minutes of the +proceedings, should be sent to the higher tribunal. This would place +before the Appellate and Supreme Courts all the facts and testimony +which the Lower Court had considered. This feature of the Commonwealth +Club bills was also covered by the measures which had been prepared by +the Bar Association. + +Under the proposed Commonwealth Club amendments, the defendant was not +permitted to appeal on questions referring to the trial jury panels or +the Grand jury, nor on any error not affecting his substantial rights. +Error in an immaterial issue, or of not sufficient importance to affect +the substantial rights of the defendant, was not, under the provisions +of the Commonwealth Club bills, to be held ground for reversal. + +"We believe," said the Committee which drew up the Commonwealth Club +bills, "that what we have proposed is in no way revolutionary and +deprives the accused person of no substantial right. The amendments +proposed are merely designed to make the present law more effective, to +relieve the Courts from the necessity of considering trivial matters and +to aid in determining more promptly whether a person accused of crime is +innocent or guilty." + +The bills as introduced in the Assembly were referred to the Assembly +Judiciary Committee. In the Senate, the bills went to the Senate +Judiciary Committee. + +The promoters of the Commonwealth Club bills made the mistake of +treating the machine Senators and Assemblymen as men who could be won +over with reason and plain statement. Instead of fighting for their +bills and demanding their passage, the agents of the club were willing +to listen courteously to suggestions from tricksters intent upon the +defeat of the measures, who were only playing for time. + +Carroll Cook was at Sacramento lobbying against the bills, as were +others of that gentleman's view of affairs. Cook actually appeared +before the Assembly Judiciary Committee on invitation of one of its +members. The courtesy shown him by Grove L. Johnson, chairman of the +Committee, was touching or nauseating, as one might view it. Johnson, +who was in effect the Committee, took occasion on the day of Cook's +appearance to denounce the measures as revolutionary, unconstitutional, +vicious. + +It is interesting to note that sixty-three of the sixty-five bills as +introduced in the Assembly never got beyond Johnson's Committee. They +died right there. The two exceptions got out of the Committee in the +closing days of the session, one on March 10th, the other on March 20th. +They were reported out with the recommendation that they do pass. It was +then too late to take any action on them. They died on the Assembly +file. + +Those who were making a fight for the measures were kept running between +the Judiciary Committee of the Assembly and that of the Senate. The +Senate Committee, while a majority of its members were against the +machine, was led by men who were not at all in sympathy with any plan +that was calculated to clear away legal cobwebs. On the pretext that the +reforms proposed were covered by the Bar Association bills, or that the +measures were duplicated by other bills, or that they were loosely +drawn, on any pretext, in fact, the Senate Committee recommended that +fifty-two of the sixty-five measures be withdrawn. And they were +withdrawn. Of the thirteen remaining, seven stuck in the Committee, died +there; five, just before the session closed, were referred back to the +Senate with the recommendation that they do not pass. They didn't. Of +the sixty-five bills, the Senate Committee gave only one favorable +recommendation. This lone recipient of Committee approval got back to +the Senate on March 5th. It died on the files. + +Such was the fate of the measures prepared under the direction of the +Commonwealth Club for reform of the methods of indictment, trial and +appeal in criminal cases. The Bar Association bills received somewhat +better treatment. + +Of the nine so-called Bar Association bills, eight passed the Senate; +the other died in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Of the eight which got +through the Senate, two were defeated in the Assembly, while six passed +that body and went to the Governor. + +Four of the six Bar Association bills which passed dealt with the repeal +of those sections of the code which provide for bills of exceptions in +criminal cases and substituted the plan, described in considering the +Commonwealth Club bills, of providing the higher Court with complete +record of the testimony and the proceedings in the trial Court. + +One of the two remaining measures requires sentence to be imposed upon a +convicted felon in not less than two nor more than five days after the +verdict or plea of guilty, with the right reserved for the Court of +extending the time to ten days. The sixth measure defines "a motion in +arrest of judgment." + +Such was the outcome of the effort made by reputable lawyers and public +spirited laymen to eliminate quackery from the practice of the criminal +law. But measures calculated to make the practice of the criminal law +even more involved and technical than it is were granted more +consideration. Many of them passed both houses. How they were passed and +what they are will be considered in another chapter. + + + +[72] No sooner had the indictments been returned in the San Francisco +cases than the validity of the indicting Grand Jury was attacked. For +months that issue occupied the attention of the Courts. One by one the +members of the Grand Jury were dragged into Court, and in effect placed +on trial that technical disqualification if such existed might be +established. The greater part of a day was, for example, consumed in +thrashing over the question whether one or three motions had been made +in nominating the stenographer to the Grand Jury. + +Then came appeals to the higher Courts which occupied more months and +all but endless labor and expense. + +When the attacks on the Grand Jury had been met and disposed of, and the +defendants brought to the trial Court, the Prosecution found its labors +scarcely begun. Every trial juror was placed on trial. Weeks and even +months were required, because of technical objections, to secure a trial +jury. + +Just before the Legislature convened, Abe Ruef, had, as example, been +convicted by a jury in the securing of which the metropolis of the State +had been raked as with a fine-tooth comb for talesmen who were not +technically disqualified to serve. Thousands were available who would +have given the defendant a fair trial, but in all San Francisco very few +could be found who were not because of one technical reason or another +disqualified. + +After conviction came the defendant's appeal, in which the Most trivial +reasons were accepted for freeing the defendant whose technical defense +had failed him in the lower Courts. Former Mayor Schmitz of San +Francisco, after conviction of extortion, and Abe Ruef, after having +pleaded guilty to the charge, were given their freedom under +circumstances which, to put it mildly, shocked the whole State. + +[73] A prominent San Francisco attorney told the writer recently that +"the criminal lawyer too often questions a talesman needlessly, not so +much to disqualify him, as to get technical error into the record." + +[73a] It was on a technicality of this kind that the District Court of +Appeals found excuse for reversal of the judgment in the case of Louis +Glass, convicted of bribing a member of the San Francisco Board of +Supervisors. E. J. Zimmer, the auditor of the Pacific States Telephone +Company, of which Glass was an official, refused to testify at Glass' +trial. The trial court refused to instruct the jury to disregard the +refusal. The Appellate Court held this to be a fatal error. + + + +Chapter XVI. + +How the Change of Venue Bill Was Passed. + +Slipped Through the Assembly Without Serious Opposition in Closing Days +of the Session - Passed by Trick in the Senate Although a Majority of +That Body Were Opposed to Its Passage - Typical Case of Machine +"Generalship." + + + +Given the presiding officers of the Senate and Assembly and the +appointment of the Committees of both bodies, the machine minority in +the Legislature had comparatively little difficulty in preventing the +passage of desirable measures. Thus, the Commonwealth Club bills to +simplify and expedite proceedings in criminal cases, or, if you like, to +prevent quackery in the practice of the criminal law, were, by clever +manipulation, defeated, although if fairly presented to Senate and +Assembly they undoubtedly would have become laws[74]. + +But when it came to passing vicious measures in the face of the +opposition of the unorganized majority of both Houses, the machine had a +harder job on its hands. A majority vote of each House is required for +the passage of a measure. To get through its bills, then, the machine +had to create a situation in which vicious measures could be rushed +through without the unorganized reformers knowing what was being done. +By preventing action on a large majority of the measures pending before +the Legislature until the end of the session, such a situation was +created. In the confusion of the closing days of the session, not only +were good bills denied passage, but vicious bills, in spite of the +opposition of a majority of the Legislature, were passed. Some normally +anti-machine members in such a situation become worn out, get +discouraged and vote for machine policies to secure machine support for +measures, the passage of which their constituents at home are demanding. +Others, in the confusion of a whirlwind close of the session, vote for +measures which they have no time to read, and which they cannot +understand. Thus, even with a majority of Senate and Assembly against +machine policies, the clever machine leaders often slip through measures +which could not be passed early in the session, when the members have +opportunity to study the bills upon which they are called upon to act, +and before the ranks of the reform element have been broken. + +This was very well illustrated at the Session of 1909 by the passage of +the so-called Change of Venue bill[74a]. This measure was introduced in +the Assembly by Grove L. Johnson. Under its provisions a person charged +with crime would have been permitted upon his whim or caprice to allege +bias and disqualify the Judge before whom he was to be tried. The +Legislature of 1907 was admittedly controlled by the machine, but even +the Legislature of 1907 did not dare pass the Change of Venue bill. The +reform Legislature of 1909, however, did pass it. The manner in which it +was passed is a lesson in machine methods. To the credit of Governor +Gillett let it be said, however, that he vetoed the measure[75]. + +Grove L. Johnson having introduced the bill, it was referred to +Johnson's committee, the Judiciary Committee of the Assembly. The +Committee held it until February 5, when it was referred back to the +Assembly with the recommendation that it "do pass." On March 13, eleven +days before adjournment, it passed the Assembly, by a vote of 42 to 15, +41 votes being required for its passage. Assemblymen like Drew, Telfer, +Wilson and Stuckenbruck, men who fought the machine and machine policies +from the beginning to the end of the session, voted for the bill. The +negative vote of any two of them would have defeated it[76]. + +The passage in the Assembly of an important reform measure as late as +March 13, would have meant its defeat in the Senate. Though in the +majority the anti-machine Senators could not have forced a reform +measure through the machine-controlled committees, machine-controlled +even when a majority of a committee was anti-machine[77]. Measures of +the Change of Venue bill stamp, however, had a clear way. The Change of +Venue bill was on March 15 referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. +On March 16, twenty-four hours after, the Committee returned the bill +with the recommendation that it do pass. On March 19, with twenty-two +Senators opposed to its passage, and eighteen favoring it, with +twenty-one votes necessary for its passage, the bill passed the Senate. +This apparently impossible feat was, in the last two weeks of the +session, a comparatively easy task for the machine. + +To begin with, Senator Black, who opposed the bill, was ill at his home +at Palo Alto. This left twenty-one Senators against the measure and +eighteen for. The line-up was as follows: + +For the Change of Venue bill - Anthony, Bates, Bills, Finn, Hare, +Hartman, Hurd, Leavitt, Martinelli, McCartney, Price, Reily, Savage, +Weed, Welch, Willis, Wolfe, Wright - 18. + +Against the Change of Venue bill - Bell, Birdsall, Boynton, +Burnett[76a], Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, +Estudillo, Holohan, Lewis, Kennedy, Miller, Roseberry, Rush, Sanford, +Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker - 21. + +On the face of it, the outlook for the passage of the Change of Venue +bill in the Senate was not good. The machine, however, planned to pass +the bill on March 19. + +The machine leaders went at the job systematically. When the Senators +took their seats that Friday morning, they found that at Senator Bates' +request, Assembly Bill 6 (the Change of Venue bill) had been put on the +Special Urgency File. The Special Urgency File was to be considered at 8 +o'clock Friday evening. Senator Bates stated in an interview that he had +placed Assembly Bill No. 6 on the Special Urgency File "at the request +of a fellow Senator." Who the fellow Senator was, Bates refused to say. +Bates insisted, however, that he knew nothing about Assembly Bill No, 6, +and could give no reason why it should be made a matter of "special +urgency." Senator Bates has since the Legislature adjourned been given a +position of trust in the United States Mint. + +With the Change of Venue bill on the Special Urgency File, the next step +was to get it considered at the moment most favorable for machine +purposes. Along about 11 o'clock in the forenoon - the reader should +keep in mind that in the ordinary course of the Senate's work the +Special Urgency File would not have been considered until 8 o'clock that +evening - Senator Wolfe moved that the Special Urgency File be taken up +out of order. But before the Change of Venue bill could be reached, +Senator Wright, who favored the passage of the measure, was found to be +absent from the Senate chamber. On Senator McCartney's motion, the +Change of Venue bill was temporarily passed on file. With the constant +coming and going of Senators, there was no time while the file was under +consideration, that the eighteen Senators counted on to vote in a solid +block for the bill, were all present. The Senate concluded consideration +of the Special Urgency File, and still the Change of Venue bill had not +been taken up. The Senate then took up the second reading of Assembly +bills, and then the Special File of Appropriation bills. A communication +from Dr. Howard Black and Dr. Harry D. Reynolds was read setting forth +that Senator Black was too ill to leave Palo Alto. Bills were passed and +bills were withdrawn. Senator Strobridge reported that Senate Bill No. +862 had been correctly engrossed. And through it all the machine was +watching for the favorable moment to force the passage of the Change of +Venue bill. + +The moment came just before noon. Like the snap of a trap Leavitt asked +for unanimous consent to take up Assembly Bill No. 6, out of order. The +anti-machine Senators are never guilty of discourteous treatment of a +fellow Senator. They granted the request. + +Senator Wright vouched for the bill. He stated that it was a good bill +and should be made a law. Senator Wolfe spoke for it, in fact led the +debate to secure its passage. On the other hand, Senator Boynton very +pointedly told Senator Wright that the bill was not a good measure and +should not be passed "Judges of the Supreme Court tell me," said +Boynton, "that this is a bad bill." + +Senator Cutten made a strong speech against the bill, which he denounced +as bad in principle. Holohan stated that if the measure became a law it +would give a bunco steerer a chance to disqualify every decent Judge in +the State. Roseberry denounced the measure as vicious. + +When the vote was taken, every Senator who supported it was in his seat, +but Burnett, Estudillo and Rush were absent. This would have made the +vote 18 to 18, the backers of the measure requiring three more +affirmative votes for its passage. But Miller and Lewis were led to vote +for the measure, which made 20 votes for the bill and 16 against it. At +this point the bill lacked one vote of passage. Estudillo was, however, +brought in under call of the Senate, and under what amounted to +misrepresentation, voted for the measure. This passed the bill by a vote +of 21 to 18. Boynton changed his vote from no to aye, to give notice +that on the next legislative day he would move to reconsider the vote by +which the bill had been passed. But before he could give notice the +Senate took its noon recess. Boynton under the rules had all day in +which to notify the Senate of his intention, but to make assurance +doubly sure, he told the clerk at the desk not to send the bill to the +Assembly for he would as soon as the Senate re-convened, give notice of +his motion to reconsider. + +Nevertheless, when the Senate reconvened, Boynton found that the bill +had been rushed over to the Assembly, "to save time," according to the +excuse given. + +Senator Boynton insisted that the bill be returned from the Assembly. +Wolfe asked Boynton "as a matter of Senatorial courtesy," to permit the +vote on the bill to be taken on a motion to have it returned from the +Assembly. This request was so ludicrous, in view of the treatment that +had been accorded Boynton, that it provoked a smile. Boynton refused to +be "courteous," the bill was returned from the Assembly and regularly +reconsidered the next day. + +With 21 votes against the measure, there seemed little doubt that it +would be reconsidered and defeated. Twenty-one votes were necessary for +reconsideration. Lewis and Miller had thought better of their vote of +Friday and were prepared to vote against the bill. Estudillo, +understanding the measure thoroughly, was anxious to set himself right +in the record by voting against it. These, with Burnett and Rush, gave +twenty-one votes, enough to force reconsideration and to defeat the +bill. + +But there was a weak link in the combination,Kennedy. Senator Kennedy +voted throughout the session consistently with the Wolfe-Leavitt +element, but he voted against the Change of Venue bill. When Saturday +morning came, however, Kennedy could not be found. When reconsideration +of the bill came up, Burnett and Rush were out in the hallway. Miller +and Lewis voted to reconsider, which made the vote eighteen to eighteen. +Twenty-one votes were necessary for reconsideration. With Kennedy, +Burnett and Rush, reconsideration could be forced and the bill defeated. +The only way the absent Senators could be reached was through a call of +the Senate, which required a majority vote of those present. A motion +for a call of the Senate was defeated by a vote of eighteen to +eighteen[78]. + +This was the real test vote on the Change of Venue bill. It will be seen +that Miller and Lewis and Estudillo, who had voted for the bill the day +before, voted for a call of the Senate. They would, on reconsideration, +have voted against the bill, and its passage on reconsideration would +have been impossible. Had Kennedy or Rush or Burnett been present, the +motion for a call of the Senate would have prevailed, the vote on the +Change of Venue bill been reconsidered, and the measure defeated. + +Half an hour later, when Kennedy's vote was necessary to enable the +machine to continue the deadlock on the Direct Primary bill, Kennedy +turned up to do his part in that not very creditable performance. + +In this way did the machine element secure the passage of the Change of +Venue bill. It was a question of good generalship, or, if you like, +trickery. Perhaps trickery is the better name for it. + + + +[74] Black's Senate bill, 1,144, came very near being defeated in the +Assembly by similar "good generalship." The measure in effect prohibits +the sale of intoxicating liquors within a mile and a half of Stanford +University. Assemblyman Bohnett was in charge of the bill. + +Bohnett, the day that the bill was to come up, was called from the room +to attend a committee meeting. Immediately did the Assembly show +astonishing activity in consideration of the file. So fast did they go +that the Stanford bill seemed destined to be reached while Bohnett was +out of the room. Had it been reached with Bohnett away it could have +been dropped to the bottom of the file, where it would have been lost, +so far as the session of the Legislature of 1909 was concerned. + +Charles R. Detrick, of Palo Alto, happened to go to the Assembly chamber +at this critical moment and took in the situation at a glance. He +accordingly hunted up Bohnett, who got back to the Assembly chamber +before the bill could be reached on file. For once "good generalship" +had failed at the legislative session of 1909. + +[74a] In 1907, the Change of Venue bill was slipped through the +Assembly, but in a form not to affect the San Francisco graft cases. In +the Senate, however, it was amended to apply to Ruef, Schmitz and their +associates. The exposure of this turn raised such a storm that the bill +was not brought to vote. However, on the night before adjournment, the +measure was slipped through the Senate as an amendment tacked on another +bill. But the trick was discovered in the Assembly and defeated. + +[75] Governor Gillett's reasons for vetoing the bill are set forth in +footnote 1, Chapter 1. + +[76] The Assembly vote on the change of venue bill was as follows: + +For the Change of Venue bill - Barndollar, Beatty, Black, Cattell, +Coghlan, Collier, Collum, Cronin, Drew, Feeley, Flint, Gibbons, +Griffiths, Hammon, Hans, Hawk, Hayes, Hewitt, Hinkle, Holmquist, Johnson +of Sacramento, Johnson of San Diego, Juilliard, Lightner, Macauley, +Maher, McClellan, McManus, Melrose, Mendenhall, Moore, Mott, Pugh, Rech, +Schmitt, Silver, Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Transue, Wagner, Wheelan, and +Wilson - 42. + +Against the Change of Venue bill - Baxter, Bohnett, Butler, Callan, +Cogswell, Dean, Gerdes, Gillis, Kehoe, Otis, Polsley, Preston, Sackett, +Whitney, and Young - 15. + +[77] The Senate Judiciary Committee for example. + +[76a] The Senators whose names are printed in italics became involved in +the confusion which led to the passage of the measure. + +[78] The vote was as follows: + +For the call of the Senate - Bell, Birdsall, Boynton, Caminetti, +Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, Estudillo, Holohan, Lewis, Miller, +Roseberry, Sanford, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker - 18. + +Against the call of the Senate - Anthony, Bates, Bills, Finn, Hare, +Hartman, Hurd, Leavitt, Martinelli, McCartney, Price, Reily, Savage, +Weed, Welch, Willis, Wolfe, Wright - 18. + + + +Chapter XVII. + +Passage of the Wheelan Bills. + +Measures Extended Abuses Which the Commonwealth Club Bills Had Been +Drawn to Prevent - Went Through Both Houses Without the Members +Thoroughly Understanding Their Significance. + + + +The so-called Wheelan bills were passed in much the same way as was the +Change of Venue bill. These measures will perhaps be better understood +in comparison with certain of the Commonwealth Club bills which were +considered in a previous chapter. + +Among the Commonwealth bills was one which denied a defendant under +indictment a copy of the testimony taken in the Grand Jury room. The +measure was drawn on the theory that Grand Juries deal principally with +secret offenses, and that the testimony had better be brought out before +the trial Court. One object of the proposed law was to prevent the +defendant giving out testimony with the deliberate object of prejudicing +the entire community against him, and thus increasing the difficulty of +getting petty juries to try him. + +Furthermore, there are instances, as when Abe Ruef was before the Grand +Jury at San Francisco, when the ends of justice require that the +testimony given shall be kept secret. But, in spite of these and other +considerations, the measure in question was allowed to die in Committee. + +On the other hand two bills requiring that transcript of such testimony +be given the defendant passed both Senate and Assembly. They were +introduced by Wheelan of San Francisco. + +Section 925 of the Penal Code, as it stood up to the time of the opening +of the session, provided that "the Grand Jury whenever criminal causes +are being investigated before them, on demand of the District Attorney +must appoint a competent stenographic reporter to be sworn and to report +the testimony that may be given in such causes in shorthand, and reduce +the same upon request of the District Attorney to long hand or +typewriting." It was thus left with the District Attorney to say whether +the stenographic reporter should be present, and whether his notes +should be transcribed. + +The first of the Wheelan bills, Assembly bill 221[79], amended the law +by cutting out the words in italics "on demand of the District Attorney" +and "upon request of the District Attorney," making it mandatory upon +the Grand Jury to have the reporter in attendance. + +Further on in the section and in Assembly bill 222[79], it was provided +that a true copy of the testimony thus taken should be given the +defendant at the time of his arraignment. + +These two measures passed both Senate and Assembly. + +Assembly bill 223[79], also introduced by Wheelan, provided another +cause for the setting aside of an indictment by the Court in which the +defendant is arraigned, upon such defendant's motion. The Commonwealth +bills aimed to prevent technical attacks upon indictments. The third of +the Wheelan bills - No. 223 - opened the way for further technical +attacks, by providing that the Court must set aside the indictment "when +it appears from the testimony taken before the Grand jury that the +defendant has been indicted upon a criminal charge without reasonable or +probable cause." + +This measure passed both Houses. It opened the way for review before the +Court of the testimony taken in the Grand jury room, and endless +technical objections, all of which by clever counsel can be employed to +delay the case being brought before a trial jury, and in the end perhaps +wear out the prosecution, thus preventing the case being tried on its +merits. With that section in the law two years ago, it is a question +whether the defendants in the graft prosecution at San Francisco would +ever have been brought to trial. + +It will be seen that while the Commonwealth Club bills aimed to decrease +the opportunities for technical defense of men charged with crime, and +thus permit the cases being tried on their merits, the Wheelan bills +increased opportunity for technical objection. + +The history of the passage of the Wheelan bills is practically the same +in each instance. + +The three bills were introduced by Mr. Wheelan on January 11th, and +referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The Committee, which +pigeon-holed sixty-three of the Commonwealth Club bills, and reported +back the two remaining too late for passage, had better treatment in +store for the Wheelan measures. They were reported back to the Assembly +on March 6th, at a time when the Assembly was fairly swamped with +pending measures. On March 17th, in the midst of a mass of legislation, +they were slipped through the Assembly without many of the members +apparently knowing what they were. The Assembly journal of that date +shows that such men as Bohnett, Callan, Cattell, Cogswell, Flint, +Gerdes, Gibbons, Gillis, Hayes, Hewitt, Hinkle, Johnson of Placer, +Juilliard, Kehoe, Mendenhall, Polsley, Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Whitney, +Wilson and Wyllie, who ordinarily voted for good measures and against +bad ones, voted for the Wheelan bills. + +With the exception of Bill No. 223, not one vote was cast against the +measures. The vote on Bill No. 223 was the last taken. Gillis, who had +voted for the two others, appears to have awakened to the fact that +something was wrong. At any rate, he voted against Bill 223. + +His was the only vote cast against any of the three bills in the lower +House, They appear to have gone through the Assembly without thorough +appreciation of their significance. At any rate, there were members +enough present, who were usually against bad measures, to have prevented +the Wheelan bills securing the forty-one votes necessary for their +passage. + +A reform measure passing the Assembly on March 17th would have had no +chance whatever in the Senate. The Wheelan bills were more fortunate. + +The Senate Judiciary Committee, before which the Commonwealth Club bills +had dragged along for weeks, received the Wheelan bills on March 17th, +the day they passed the Assembly, and the same day, March 17th, reported +them back to the Senate with the recommendation that they do pass. On +March 18th the measures were read the second time in the Senate, and on +March 20th, three days after they had passed the Assembly, the Senate +passed them. + +Such is the difference in action on machine-favored bills and bills +which the machine does not favor. Incidentally, it may be said that at +the time the Wheelan bills were before the Senate, the machine had that +body tied up in the fight on the Direct Primary bill. + +The reform element - at the mercy of the Senate organization - was +compelled to devote its whole attention to the Direct Primary bill. The +machine was thus left to run committees and Senate at its own free will. +It was an admirable situation from the machine standpoint. + +But by the time the Wheelan bills had been hastened to the floor of the +Senate, the reform Senators apparently awoke to the fact that some sort +of a job was on the way. When the bills came up for final passage, +however, the anti-machine Senators were apparently as much at a loss +concerning them as the anti-machine Assemblymen had been. + +Bill number 221 came up first, and even Senator Bell, the staunchest +opponent of bad laws of them all, voted for it. With Senator Bell voted +Caminetti, Estudillo, Rush, Thompson and Walker, who were ordinarily +against the passage of bad bills. As the measure received but +twenty-three votes, any three of these by voting no could have defeated +it. + +Price, who had voted for the bill, gave notice, at the request of a +fellow Senator, that on the next legislative day he would move to +reconsider the vote by which the bill had been passed. + +Before taking up Assembly bill 222, companion bill to 221, the Senate +passed three measures and considered several others. By the time +Assembly bill 222 was reached, Senator Bell had got his bearings, and +voted against it. Caminetti had also found himself, and although +Caminetti voted for the measure, he gave notice, that on the next +legislative day he would move for its reconsideration. + +The third of the bills, No. 223, followed 222, and Walker, who had voted +for the two other bills, voted "no." The bill was passed by twenty-three +votes, Cutten voting "aye" for the purpose of giving notice to +reconsider. + +The motions to reconsider were voted upon on the afternoon of Monday, +March 22, the day of the final fight on the Direct Primary bill in both +Senate and Assembly. Nobody was thinking of much of anything else that +day. In every instance reconsideration was denied[80]. The vote by which +they had passed the Senate stood. + + + +[79] Governor Gillett signed Assembly bills Nos. 221 and 222. They are +now the law of the State. Assembly bill No. 223 he did not sign. It did +not, therefore, become a law. + +[80] The Assembly history of March 23, fails to record that the motions +to reconsider were made on the three Wheelan bills. In an article +concerning these bills which the writer prepared for the Sacramento Bee, +governed by the official record of the measures, the History of the +House in which they originated, he stated that motions for their +reconsideration were not made. The Senate Journal of March 22, however, +pages 23 and 26, shows that these motions were made, and in all three +cases defeated. + + + +Chapter XVIII. + +Defeat of the Local Option Bill. + +Peculiar Arrangement by Which the Bill Was Sidetracked in the Assembly - +Stanton Promised That It Should Pass the Lower House If It Passed the +Senate - How It Was Smothered in the Upper House. + + + +Because there is no particular reason why California should not have a +Local Option law, in the face of popular demand for it, a large number +of very worthy citizens assumed that one would be passed. The fact seems +to have been lost sight of that the tenderloin element opposes such +legislation, and that the management of the so-called liquor interests +organized as the "Royal Arch," takes a shortsighted view of Local Option +provisions. The machine was thus interested. Its representatives in +Senate and Assembly did not propose that any Local Option bill should +pass. So the Local Option bill was smothered. The smothering process +most suggestively indicates how such things can be done. + +The measure was introduced in the Assembly by Wyllie and in the Senate +by Estudillo. In the face of the popular demand for the passage of such +a bill, and the exasperation of a no small portion of the voters of the +State, at the mistake - or trick - by which in 1907 the only measure +resembling a Local Option law was rubbed off the statute books, it was +not good policy to fight the bill in the open. So the machine proceeded +to do covertly what would have been "poor politics" to do openly[81]. + +The same bill having been introduced both in Senate and Assembly, the +first step was to tie up either the Assembly or the Senate measure, so +that the whole crafty campaign against the bill's passage could be +confined to one House. The way in which this was done was simplicity +itself. The Wyllie bill, as introduced in the Assembly was, at the +request of Speaker Stanton, held up in the Assembly Committee on Public +Morals. Most plausible reason was given for this course. It was pointed +out that since the Assembly had gone on record before the Senate on the +anti-gambling bill, on women's suffrage[80a] and other "moral" issues, +it was unfair to compel the lower House to go on record before the +Senate on the Local Option bill. Speaker Stanton assured the proponents +of the measure that if it passed the Senate, it should pass the +Assembly. + +Stanton accordingly recognized that the Assembly, given an opportunity, +would pass the bill. Had it passed the Assembly before the middle of +February, it would unquestionably have passed the Senate. But the +proponents of the measure consented to the plan to make the Senate act +first. The fight for the passage of the bill accordingly took place in +the Senate. + +Before taking up the Senate measure introduced by Estudillo, the Wyllie +bill may as well be disposed of. It was introduced in the Assembly +January 8th, and was sent to the Committee on Public Morals. There it +lay until March 13th, two months and five days, when the proponents of +the measure, realizing that they were being tricked, made their protest +so loud that the measure was reported by the Committee, but without +recommendation. There was no time then to pass the bill, and on March +15th it was withdrawn by its author. + +The Estudillo bill, as it was known on the Senate side of the Capitol, +had a more eventful history. Introduced in the Senate on January 8th, it +had gone to the famous Committee on Election Laws, which had been +stacked for the defeat of the Direct Primary bill. Estudillo was, to be +sure, Chairman of the Committee, but a lamb herding lions never had a +harder job on its hands than did Estudillo. He could not get his +committee together to consider the well-backed Direct Primary bill, let +alone the worthy but not politically supported local option measure. + +Along about the middle of February, however, Estudillo succeeded in +getting the committee to act. By a vote of four to four the committee +refused to recommend the Local Option bill for passage. Senator Stetson, +who favored the passage of the measure, to compel committee action and +get the bill before the Senate, thereupon moved that the bill be +referred back to the Senate with recommendation that it do not pass. +Senator Stetson's motion prevailed. + +Thus, the measure went back to the Senate with a majority committee +report that it do not pass. But in spite of this adverse report, the +Senate passed the measure on second reading and sent it to engrossment +and third reading. It looked very much just then as though the bill +would pass the Senate. + +But the resourceful machine had other plans. When the measure came up +for final passage on February 24th, instead of being voted upon, and +passed or defeated, it was amended. + +To amend a bill on third reading exasperates those who are supporting it +as nothing else can. The bill must, when thus amended, be reprinted and +re-engrossed before it can be passed. The delays thus caused very often +result in the defeat of the measure. + +But the reprinted and re-engrossed Local Option bill got back to the +Senate on February 26th, and its supporters could think of no other +possible excuse for delaying its passage. + +But the machine could, and did. On Senator Wolfe's motion - the reader +will no doubt remember that Senator Wolfe led the fight against the +Direct Primary bill, against the Anti-Gambling bill and against the +effective Stetson Railroad Regulation bill - on Senator Wolfe's motion +the Local Option bill, instead of being put on its final passage, was +sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. + +At that time, the closing days of February, the Judiciary Committee was +fairly swamped with important measures. The Railroad Regulation bills, +the Initiative Amendment, the measures providing for the simplification +of methods of criminal procedure and other bills of scarcely less +importance were pending before that committee. Prompt action on the +Local Option bill was out of the question. And, although a majority of +the committee favored the passage of the bill, the minority which was +against it took precious good care that no undue haste should attend its +consideration. Estudillo was in constant attendance upon the committee, +but to little purpose. It was not until March 4th that the committee +acted. The action was, of course, recommendation that the bill do pass. + +The bill had been amended from time to time, but as it was finally +approved by the Judiciary Committee was a reasonably effective measure. +It provided that on a petition signed by 25 per cent of the electors of +any city, or town, or county, the question of license or no license must +be put on the regular election ballot. If a majority of the electors +voted against the issuing of liquor licenses in any city or town or +township, the governing body could no longer issue saloon licenses. +Outside incorporated cities and towns, the basis of prohibition was made +the township, although the vote was to be taken throughout the county. + +After the measure had been returned from the Judiciary Committee of the +Senate, Estudillo fought manfully to have it considered. He finally +succeeded, on March 8th, in having the bill made a special order, that +is to say, he arranged that the Senate should consider it at 8 o'clock +of Thursday, March 11th. + +But when Thursday came it developed that Senators Stetson and Boynton +could not be present that evening, and they asked Estudillo to have the +vote on the measure postponed until noon of the next day, Friday. This +Estudillo attempted to do. The thing was done with other bills every +day. Had Wolfe made the request, for example, or even Estudillo on any +other measure than the Local Option bill, the request would have been +granted without thought or comment. But on Wolfe's objection Estudillo's +request was denied. The machine saw its opportunity and succeeded in +having consideration of the bill postponed until the following Monday, +March 15th. This meant the defeat of the bill. Even had it passed the +Senate on that date, filibustering tactics would have defeated it in the +Assembly. + +Nevertheless, the backers of the measure - although pleaded with by +weak-kneed Senators to withdraw the bill - insisted upon a vote being +taken, when the measure came up on March 15th. This decision compelled +Wolfe to make his famous "Fate of the Republican Party" speech, in which +he predicted that if the Local Option bill became a law, utter wreck +would come upon the Republican party in California. Birdsall, Caminetti, +Holohan, Rush, Sanford and Strobridge, whose votes were ordinarily +recorded against the machine Senators, voted against the bill, as did +Anthony and Curtin. Wright voted for the measure, but otherwise those +who had voted against the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill, against a +State-wide vote for United States Senators, against the Stetson Railroad +Regulation bill, in a word, those whom for the want of a better term we +call machine Senators, voted solidly against the Local Option bill[82]. + +The final showing for the Local Option bill was not a good one, but in +spite of it, many in touch with conditions in the Senate held that had +the vote been taken in the middle of February instead of the middle of +March, the bill would have had a good chance for passage. After the +delay of ten weeks from the time of its introduction until the final +vote upon it, there was no chance at all for it to become a law. + + + +[81] Up to the legislative session of 1907, the County Government Act +provided that the Supervisors of a county could submit any question - +including the matter of regulating the liquor traffic - to the voters +for the purpose of ascertaining their opinion upon the issue. There was, +however, no way to compel the Supervisors to take the action that might +be thus decided upon by popular vote. The Supervisors could act upon the +vote or ignore it, as they saw fit. + +The Legislature of 1907 transferred the County Government Act to the +Codes. For some reason, either by intention or oversight, the section +which permitted Supervisors to submit questions to the people for an +advisory vote was omitted. It has been held that this action of the +Legislature repealed the section by implication. It is held, therefore, +that no law is upon the Statute books by which the people may be +permitted to vote even in an advisory capacity upon any question of +police regulation or public policy. + +[80a] A fine example of a lightning switch of plan on the part of the +machine came in the fight on the Women's Suffrage Amendment. The +tenderloin and liquor interests in general are opposed to the submission +of this amendment to the people, which means, of course, that the +machine is against it. To submit the amendment to the people, fifty-four +votes are required in the Assembly and twenty-seven in the Senate. This +year, the program was to let the amendment pass the Assembly and defeat +it in the Senate. Assemblymen were allowed to pledge themselves to its +support until there were fifty-eight Assemblymen down to vote for it. +Grove L. Johnson had introduced the measure in the Assembly, and its +adoption by that body seemed assured. + +But the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill got in the way of Woman's Suffrage +in a most curious manner. When the passage of this anti-gambling bill +became a certainty, that branch of the group of tenderloin Senators +whose interests were wrapped up in racetrack gambling, became "very +sore." In their disgruntlement they decided to give reform full swing, +and put the Woman's Suffrage Amendment through the Senate. This attitude +seriously alarmed the safe, sane and respectable leaders of the machine, +who see all sorts of trouble for the machine if women are given the +ballot. So to prevent its tenderloin associates in the Senate doing +anything rash, the machine decided rather late in the day to defeat the +amendment in the Assembly. + +When this decision was reached, and the order to carry it into effect +given, the machine Assemblymen who had agreed to vote for the amendment +coolly forgot their pledges. Instead of fifty-eight votes, only +thirty-nine were cast for the amendment. + +Grove L. Johnson, who had introduced it, and who pretended to support +it, agreed to move for its reconsideration. When the hour for the motion +for reconsideration came, Johnson huddled up in his seat, looking +neither to right or left, let the opportunity pass. + +The vote by which the amendment was defeated was as follows: + +For the amendment: Barndollar, Bohnett, Butler, Callan, Cattell, +Coghlan, Cogswell, Collum, Costar, Cronin, Drew, Gibbons, Gillis, Hayes, +Hewitt, Hinkle, Holmquist, Hopkins, Johnson of Sacramento, Johnson of +San Diego, Johnson of Placer, Juilliard, Kehoe, Maher, Melrose, +Mendenhall, Otis, O'Neil, Polsley, Pulcifer, Sackett, Silver, +Stuckenbruck, Telfer, Webber, Wheelan, Wilson, Wyllie, Young - 39. + +Against the amendment: Baxter, Beardslee, Beatty, Beban, Collier, +Cullen, Dean, Feeley, Flavelle, Fleisher, Flint, Gerdes, Greer, +Griffiths, Hammon, Hanlon, Hans, Hawk, Johnston of Contra Costa, Leeds, +Lightner, Macaulay, McClellan, McManus, Moore, Mott, Nelson, Odom, +Preston, Pugh, Rech, Rutherford, Schmitt, Stanton, Transue, Wagner, +Whitney - 37. + +[82] The vote on the local option bill was as follows: + +For the bill - Bell, Black, Boynton, Campbell, Cartwright, Cutten, +Estudillo, Miller, Roseberry, Thompson, Walker, Wright - 12. + +Against the bill - Anthony, Bills, Birdsall, Burnett, Caminetti, Curtin, +Finn, Hare, Hartman, Holohan, Hurd, Kennedy, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, +McCartney, Price, Reily, Rush, Sanford, Strobridge, Weed, Welch, Willis, +Wolfe - 25. + + + +Chapter XIX. + +Defeat of the Initiative Amendment. + +As in the Case of Other Reform Measures It Was Held Back Until Near the +Close of the Session - Principle Adopted by Many California +Municipalities - Machine Thoroughly Aroused to Its Importance. + + + +A most estimable old lady once tried with indifferent success to hold +back the incoming tide of the Atlantic with a broom. As one watches the +efforts of the machine, through such agents as Gus Hartman, Eddie Wolfe +and Frank Leavitt, to stem the reform movement which is sweeping the +country, he is strongly reminded of the old lady's endeavor. + +To be sure, the machine, at the legislative session of 1909, by trick +and clever manipulation succeeded in preventing any very effective +reform legislation going on the Statute books. But nevertheless the +machine was compelled in response to the popular demand to permit the +passage of a direct primary law, however inadequate and disappointing it +may prove to be, and a railroad regulation law, however ineffective. + +The machine's success was not on the whole so much in its permanent +defeat of good measures as in delaying their adoption. The machine, +except in the case of the race-track gamblers, could and did put off the +day of the people's reckoning with machine-protected interests, but on +desperately small margins at times, and under conditions which point +plainly to the machine's ultimate undoing. + +A bull once attempted to stop a freight train with his head. The train +was brought to a standstill and the animal driven off the track. A short +time later the bull tried the same experiment with an express train. The +train did not stop, nor was it seriously delayed. + +The aim of the reform movement is to place the government of Nation, +State and city back into the hands of the people. To this end States and +municipalities throughout the country are trying the direct primary +system of nominating candidates for office, extending the principle of +local option, establishing the Initiative, the Referendum and the +Recall, and experimenting, often with admirable success, sometimes with +discouraging failure, with other "wicked innovations," as Assemblyman +Grove L. Johnson would call them. + +Without the machine fully appreciating what has been going on, +California has for a decade or more been pushing rapidly to the fore in +the promotion of these reforms. In this State the reform policies have +found their best expression in recently adopted municipal charters. +These charters must be ratified by the Legislature, but up to the +session just closed their ratification - "wicked innovations and all" +- has met with no particular opposition. + +Thus we find most of the modern charters of California municipalities +containing provisions for really effective primary nominations by the +people[83], for the initiation of laws, for the referendum, even for the +recall from office of corrupt officials, which have placed in the hands +of the people of the cities a club over the machine which has proved +most effective. + +But the machine is now fully alive to what such provisions as the +initiative and the recall mean. When, for example, the machine in +control of the City Council attempted to deny the Western Pacific right +of way through the City of Sacramento, the people resorted to the +charter provision granting them the Initiative, and by their direct vote +awarded the right of way. + +Even while the Legislature was in session, one of the machine's most +effective workers, Walter Parker, could not be present at his post at +Sacramento, because he was required at Los Angeles, where, because of +the "recall," the machine was in a peck of trouble. + +The people of that city were employing the recall provision of their +charter against the machine Mayor trapped in corruption. Although the +then Mayor is a "Democrat" and Parker a "Republican," Parker's presence +was required at Los Angeles to back the machine's efforts to hold the +Mayor in his job. + +So Parker could not be at Sacramento, where the machine really needed +him. The machine leaders did not think it possible that a real Mayor - +especially a machine Mayor - could be dismissed from office through such +a "fool innovation" as the recall. But that's what, in spite of machine +efforts, happened at Los Angeles. + +These experiences and others like them, forced it upon the understanding +of machine leaders that the initiative, recall and similar +"innovations," have a business end; that they put altogether too much +power into the hands of the people for the machine's safety. + +Up to the session of 1909 there had been practically no opposition to +the ratification of charters adopted by the several municipalities. But +this year the machine leader in the Senate, Wolfe, let it be known that +he would henceforth oppose "freak charters," "freak charters" to Senator +Wolfe being those of the initiative-referendum-recall order. + +Several municipalities - Berkeley, San Diego, Palo Alto, Santa Barbara, +San Bernardino, Richmond, Los Angeles, Pasadena and Oakland - had either +sent new charters or important amendments to existing charters to the +Legislature for ratification. Many of the charters and amendments came +decidedly under Wolfe's ideas of "freak." But there are some extremes to +which the machine dare not go, and it did not dare to go on record as +against popular municipal government. Wolfe and his associates could and +did grumble, but they did not dare refuse the several charters and +charter amendments ratification. + +So they let the charters and charter amendments go by them and braced +themselves against granting Statewide initiative. + +That issue came up in the form of a proposed amendment to the State +Constitution introduced by Senator Black, which gave the people of the +State the power enjoyed by the people of Oregon and of the more advanced +California municipalities, the power to initiate laws. + +Black's amendment provided that on petition of eight per cent of the +electors of the State proposing a law or Constitutional amendment, such +law or amendment must be submitted to a vote of the people at the next +general election, precisely as Constitutional amendments are now +submitted. If the proposed law or amendment received a majority vote it +was to become a law of the State, independent of Legislative action. In +a word, the people of California, had the amendment carried, would have +been able to initiate the laws which govern them. + +Naturally, the machine, always on thin ice at best, thoroughly aroused +to what the initiative means, opposed any such "wicked innovation." + +In its opposition, the machine was backed by that extreme conservatism, +which, while sincere enough, forever hangs on the coattails of progress; +the conservatism which even in New England as late as 1860 drew back its +respectable skirts from abolition; the conservatism which, dragged +protesting over a crisis, never fails to assume for itself all the +credit for what has been accomplished. Thus the machine had some very +respectable assistance in its efforts against the Initiative Amendment, +the measure which more than any other before the Legislature was +calculated to take the government of California out of machine +hands[84]. + +On the other hand, the amendment had strong backing. It had been drawn +up at the instance of the Direct Legislation League, which numbers among +its members many of the foremost bankers, capitalists, educators and +public men of the State - Rudolph Spreckels, Francis J. Heney, James D. +Phelan, of San Francisco, and Dr. John R. Haynes of Los Angeles, and +others fully as prominent being among the League's most active +supporters. + +In addition, the amendment had the endorsement of the State Grange, of, +the Labor Unions, of the State, county and municipal Democratic +conventions, and of many of the municipal and county Republican +conventions. + +But there were plenty of reasons given why the amendment should not be +submitted to the people. Perhaps the most amusing came from Senator +Wright, of Direct Primary and Railroad Regulation notoriety. Senator +Wright held that inasmuch as the Direct Primary will result in the +election of high-class legislators, the initiative will not be +necessary. + +But the two principal objections raised to the initiative were that: + +1. It would lead to a flood of bills being submitted to the people. + +2. That the people would not take sufficient interest in the proposed +laws to consider them carefully. + +Both these objections were readily answered by the proponents of the +amendment, who gave the experience of States in which the initiative has +been tried. + +Oregon, for example, adopted the initiative in 1902. In 1904 but two +proposed laws were introduced under it; in 1906, five; and in 1908, +nineteen. Inasmuch as in 1908 California voted upon twenty-one +constitutional amendments and statutes which had been submitted by the +Legislature of 1907, it will be seen that Oregon was not particularly +submerged by a flood of elector-initiated legislation. + +In Canton Berne, Switzerland, where for half a century all the laws have +been adopted by the initiative system, the average of laws proposed has +been only two and a half a year. + +As to the second objection, it was easily shown that in Oregon the +keenest interest is taken in the measures proposed through the +initiative. Some were shown to have been adopted by enormous majorities; +others to have been rejected by majorities as large. + +Thus the objections to the amendment were easily disposed of. + +Their arguments answered, the opponents of the amendment schemed to +prevent its consideration until the closing days of the session or +prevent consideration entirely. + +In the Assembly, the amendment had been introduced by Drew of Fresno. It +was referred to the Committee on Constitutional Amendments, where it was +smothered to death. Although referred to the committee on January 11, +the committee took no action upon it. Coghlan of San Francisco was +chairman of the committee; associated with him were Legislators of the +types of Johnson of Sacramento, McClelland and Baxter. In vain those +advocating the adoption of the amendment urged the committee to act. +Meetings were indeed arranged, at which the proponents of the reform +would be present, but the committeemen would fail to attend. + +A less exasperating, but no less effective fight was carried on in the +Senate. + +On the Senate side, the amendment introduced by Black went to the +Judiciary Committee. This committee was made up of the nineteen lawyers +in the Senate, every lawyer going on the committee. But Warren Porter +named the order of their rank, and the chairman and the four ranking +members of the committee voted eternally with the Wolfe-Leavitt faction. +On a straight vote the majority of the committee was against the +machine, as was shown in the fight for an effective railroad regulation +bill. But when it came to getting results in the Senate Judiciary +Committee, craft and leadership, as has been shown in previous chapters, +not infrequently overcame numbers. + +On February 16, the reform element of the committee insisted that action +be taken on the amendment. Chairman Willis was reluctant to put the +question. Few machine members of the committee were in attendance. The +anti-machine members were insistent. Willis was finally forced to put +the question, and the amendment, after the percentage of voters required +to sign a petition for the initiation of a law had been raised from +eight to twelve per cent, was favorably reported back to the Senate. + +But Senator Willis was able to do on the floor of the Senate what he had +been unable to do in the committee, namely, secure further delay. He +protested to the Senate at the "snap judgment" of his committee, with +the result that it was re-referred to that body. The committee, however, +for the second time sent it back to the Senate with the recommendation +that it be adopted. + +Then followed a series of delays in the Senate, so that the measure was +not brought to vote until March 11th. + +For the adoption of a Constitutional amendment, a two-thirds vote - +twenty-seven - is required in the Senate. The proponents of the +amendment had good reason to believe that that number of Senators would +vote for its adoption. The Senators counted upon to vote for the +amendment were: Anthony, Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Caminetti, +Campbell, Cutten, Estudillo, Hare, Kennedy, McCartney, Reily, Roseberry, +Rush, Sanford, Stetson, Thompson, Walker, Welch - 20, who actually voted +for the amendment; Finn, Strobridge, Cartwright and Holohan, who were +absent when the vote was taken, but who were pledged to the reform; +Lewis, Bills, Curtin and Miller, who were counted on the side of the +amendment until it came to a vote. This made twenty-eight votes, one +more than enough for adoption. + +Kennedy, Reily, Welch, Finn and Hare, usually against reform +legislation, were counted for the Initiative because of convention +obligations which could not well be ignored. Lewis, McCartney and Bills +were counted for it because of their alleged promise of its support; +Curtin and Miller because the Democratic State Convention had endorsed +the Initiative, and for the further reason that Curtin and Miller were +ordinarily for reform legislation. + +But on the vote, the unfortunate Hare, Kennedy, Reily, McCartney and +Welch remained true to their obligations, while Curtin and Miller +disappointed those who had expected their support. The negative vote of +Bills and Lewis did not cause much disappointment, for little else was +to have been expected, and anyway, the negative votes of Curtin and +Miller were enough to defeat the amendment. + +Curtin and Miller, in spite of their party's endorsement of the policy, +expressed themselves as "scandalized" at such an idea as the Initiative. +But as good men as Miller and Curtin were scandalized at the idea of +abolition in 1860, only to become the most earnest supporters of the +Emancipation Proclamation three years later. + +Reform waves, like the Atlantic Ocean, are not kept back with brooms - +or Gus Hartmans. + + + +[83] For example the charters of Los Angeles and of Berkeley. The +Berkeley charter is a model in this respect. It provides that any +qualified citizen may become a candidate for municipal office, by +petition of twenty-five electors, AND IN NO OTHER WAY. The party tag is +thus done away with. At the election, if a candidate receive a majority +of the votes he is declared elected. If no candidate receive a majority, +then a second election is held at which the two candidates receiving the +highest pluralities become candidates, the names of all other candidates +who participated at the first election are dropped. The candidate at the +second election who receives the majority is declared elected. A +movement is on foot to have a similar provision incorporated into the +San Francisco charter. + +[84] "As a source of public education upon which free government must +always rest, as a means of conservative progress, upon which the +continued life of all nations depends, as a check upon paternalism and +rich gifts calculated to lull to sleep the love of freedom, as the key +that may be used to open the door to equal opportunity, the Initiative +is fundamentally more important than all other proposed reforms put +together. " - Arthur Twining Hadley, LL. D., in "The Constitutional +Position of Property in America." + +It is interesting to note, that nearly a quarter of a century ago. Bryce +in his American Commonwealth, pointed out that this country could not +without the initiation of laws by The People enjoy the fruits of its +institutions. + + + +Chapter XX. + +Defeat of the Anti-Japanese Bills[86]. + +Stir Storm in the Assembly, But All the Bills Were Finally Defeated - +Grove L. Johnson Denounces Action of Governor Gillett and President +Roosevelt - Speaker Stanton Places Himself in a Very Embarrassing +Position - His Effective Speech Becomes a Joke. + + + +The Japanese problem under the bludgeoning of the big stick in the +skilled hands of President Roosevelt, and free application of the +organization switch in the hands of Governor Gillett, was kept fairly +well under control during the entire session. That the problem is real +was demonstrated by the numerous resolutions and alien-regulation bills +which were introduced in both Houses. The Assembly, however, was the +scene of the final defeat of the anti-Japanese element. There the +legislative campaign against the Japanese was fought out, and there it +was lost. + +The contest in the Assembly narrowed down to three measures, Assembly +Bill 78, introduced by Drew of Fresno, known as the "Alien Land Bill"; +Assembly Bill 14, known as the "Anti-Japanese School Bill," and Assembly +Bill 32, known as the "Municipal Segregation Bill," both introduced by +Johnson of Sacramento. The final defeat of these bills settled the +Japanese question so far as the legislative session of 1909 was +concerned. + +Drew's Alien Land bill was by far the most important of the three. It +was in effect a copy of the alien land law at present in force in the +State of Illinois, and generally known as the "Illinois Law." Under its +provisions an alien acquiring title to lands situate in this State, was +given five years in which to become a citizen of the United States; +failing to become a citizen, he was required to dispose of his holdings +to a citizen; failing so to do, the necessary machinery was provided for +the District Attorney of the county in which the land was situated to +dispose of it, and turn the proceeds of the sale over to the alien +owner. Ample protection was provided for alien minors who might possess +or might become possessed of California real property. Furthermore, +under the provisions of the law, the leasing of land to aliens for a +longer period than one year was prohibited. + +Though the word, "Japanese," did not appear, the bill's introduction was +a shot which if not heard round the world, at least reached Washington +on the East and Tokio on the West. Finally, on January 25, Governor +Gillett made the Alien bills pending before the Legislature subject of a +special message to Senate and Assembly, in which he urged the +Legislature to do nothing that would disrupt the pleasant relations +existing between America and Japan, and recommended that an +appropriation be made to enable the Labor Commissioner to take a census +showing the number of Japanese now in the State, with such other +information regarding them as could be used in making a proper report to +the President and Congress[87a]. + +Governor Gillett in the paragraph of his message[87] which dealt with +the Alien Land bill, stated that the measure might be amended so that +its passage would not embarrass the Federal Government. Mr. Drew +promptly sent the Governor a note, inquiring "how amended." The Governor +replied[88], stating that, in his judgment the best possible law that +could be passed on the question of alien ownership of land would be the +law which had been adopted by Oklahoma. Furthermore, the Governor +expressed the opinion that such a law would be satisfactory to President +Roosevelt and Secretary Root. + +Mr. Drew was quick to act on the suggestion. He not only yielded to the +Governor's wishes[89], but in the teeth of the severest opposition from +the San Francisco delegation, forced delay of the passage of his bill +until the Oklahoma law could be substituted for that taken from the +Illinois Statutes. + +The substitute measure provided that "no alien shall acquire title or +own land in the State of California," but the provisions of the act +further provided that the law "shall not apply to lands now owned in +this State by aliens so long as they are held by their present owners." + +The substitute measure was introduced on February 1st; it came up for +passage on February 3rd. In the two days which elapsed between the +introduction and final action on the bill, the high State authorities +decided to oppose it. Speaker Phil Stanton employed his influence +against it; one by one its supports who could "be reached" were "pulled +down." Drew found himself at the final with slight following. The bill +was defeated by the decisive vote of 28 to 48. Mott gave notice of +motion to reconsider, but the next day reconsideration was denied. + +The day following the defeat of the Alien Land bill, February 4th, the +"Anti-Japanese School Bill" and the "Municipal Segregation Bill" came up +for final action. There was also Assembly Bill 15, classed as an +anti-Japanese measure, which came up on the same day. It, as in the case +of the two others, had been introduced by Johnson of Sacramento, by far +the ablest parliamentarian in the Legislature. Drew had used facts and +figures when arguing for his alien land bills; Johnson seasoned his +statistics with a sarcasm[90] as peppery as one of Mr. Roosevelt's +ingenuous opinions on "nature fakers." But while Mr. Johnson entertained +with his wit and his invective, he failed to overcome the tremendous +influence, State and Federal, that had been brought to bear against his +bills. Assembly Bill 15, denying aliens the right to serve as directors +on California corporations, was defeated by a vote of 15 for to 53 +against. Assembly Bill 32, the "Municipal Segregation Bill,"[91] was +defeated by the close vote of 39 for to 35 against, 41 votes being +required for its passage. + +And then the Assembly took another tack, and by a vote of 45 to 29, +passed Assembly Bill 14, the Anti-Japanese School bill. Leeds changed +his vote from no to aye to give notice that he would the next +legislative day move to reconsider the vote by which the bill had been +passed. The Assembly then adjourned. The day had been eventful. A more +eventful was to follow. + +The passage of Assembly Bill 14, after the defeat of the other so-called +anti-Japanese measures, brought a characteristic telegram from President +Roosevelt to Governor Gillett. "This (Assembly Bill 14) is the most +offensive bill of them all," telegraphed the President, "and in my +judgment is clearly unconstitutional, and we should at once have to test +it in the courts. Can it not be stopped in the Legislature or by veto?" + +Governor Gillett incorporated that telegram in a message which he sent +to Senate and Assembly the next day. "A telegram so forcible as this," +said the Governor, "from the President of the United States, is entitled +to full consideration, and demands that no hasty or ill-considered +action be taken by this State which may involve the whole country. It +seems to me that it is time to lay sentiment and personal opinion and +considerations aside and take a broad and unprejudiced view of the +important question involved in the proposed legislation, and in a calm +and dispassionate manner pass upon them, keeping in mind not only the +interests of our State, but of the Nation as well, and the duty we owe +to it in observing the treaties entered into by it with a friendly +power." + +"I trust," concluded the Governor, "that no action will be taken which +will violate any treaty made by our country or in any manner question +its good faith. I most respectfully submit this message to you with the +full hope and belief that when final action shall be taken nothing will +be done which can be the subject of criticism by the people of this +Nation, and that no law will be enacted which will be in contravention +of the Constitution or any treaty of the United States." + +The Governor's message was not at all well received[92]; in fact, +Governor and message were denounced by both Republican and Democratic +Assemblymen. + + From the hour that the bill had been passed, the Governor had been in +consultation with his lieutenants in the Assembly. Speaker Stanton made +canvass of the situation. But little headway was made. That +reconsideration would be denied was evident. Leeds, to save the +situation, moved that reconsideration be postponed until February 10th. +An amendment was made that it be re-referred to the Judiciary Committee. +It was on this amended motion that the issue was fought out. + +"I know what you want," declared Johnson of Sacramento in his opening +speech, "and you know it. You want to bury this bill. You want time to +hold another caucus on the question and decide what you will do. You +want time to take another canvass of this Assembly." + +Had the question been put when Johnson had concluded, reconsideration +would unquestionably have been denied. In the emergency, Speaker Stanton +left his desk and took the floor to plead for delay. For once in his +life, at least, Phil Stanton was impressive. He did not say much, - and +as the sequel showed he had little to say - but there was a suggestion +of thundering guns and sacked cities and marching armies in his words, +that caused the listening statesmen to follow him with unstatesmen-like +uneasiness. + +"It was not my intention," said Stanton, "to take the floor unless we +were confronted by some grave crisis. Such a crisis is, in my opinion, +upon us. I not only believe it, but I know it. But my lips are sealed." + +"I would that I could tell you what I know, but I cannot for the +present. But I can tell you that we are treading upon dangerous ground. +I can feel it slipping from under my feet." + +"In my judgment this matter should be postponed. I believe that further +information will, within a few days, be given you." + +The psychological moment had come in the history of Assembly Bill 14. +All eyes were turned on Johnson of Sacramento. It was for him to say +whether the postponement asked should be granted. Had Johnson said "no," +such was the attitude of the Assembly at that moment, reconsideration of +the measure would unquestionably have been denied, and Assembly Bill 14 +declared passed by the House of its origin. + +But Johnson did not say "no."[93] Instead, he entered upon a rambling +excuse for advocating acquiescence in Stanton's request for delay. He +rambled on that he believed that Governor Gillett had been indiscreet; +that he (Johnson) did not propose to be dictated to by a "fanatical +President eternally seeking the limelight." + +"But," concluded Johnson, "I have listened to the words of our Speaker, +and I see that he is profoundly moved. For this reason I am willing that +the bill go over until Wednesday, but out of respect to our Speaker, and +for no one else on earth." + +When Johnson sat down, one could have heard a pin drop. Not a dissenting +voice was heard. Further consideration of the measure was postponed +until February 10. + +The day preceding final action on the bill was given over to conferences +and caucuses. The Democrats caucused and agreed to stand as a unit for +the bill. Grove L. Johnson's immediate followers rallied to its support. +On the other hand, a conference of those opposing the measure was held +in Governor Gillett's office. Grove L. Johnson is alleged to have been +called to the carpet. He was asked to withdraw his support of the +measure. Johnson is quoted as replying: + + "Show me why I should not support it. Give me the reasons, the facts + and figures, why Roosevelt has any right to interfere with this + measure. I want something definite. I have heard these suppositions + and insinuations for years and years. Let me know, gentlemen, what + information you have confided to you that should induce me to + withdraw my support and bow to the telegram from Roosevelt." + +The hour for reconsideration of the bill, 11 a. m. of February 10, +arrived with the situation practically unchanged. Assemblyman Transue, +Stanton's right hand man in the fight against the bill, presented an +elaborate resolution, laboriously prepared by the opponents of the +measure, setting forth why it should be defeated[94]. In it the right of +the State to pass such school-regulating laws as it may see fit was +affirmed, and the constitutionality of the pending measure alleged, but +the Assembly was urged to do nothing to disturb the relations existing +between this Government and a friendly power. The resolution did not +strengthen the position of the opponents of the bill in the least. In +fact, several of their number were estranged. So worked up had the +Assemblymen become, that Beardslee of San Joaquin moved that Transue's +resolution be considered in executive session, but the motion was lost. +The resolution was later withdrawn. + +The debate turned principally on demands from the supporters of the +bill, that Speaker Stanton tell why he had felt "the ground slipping +from under his feet" in his speech of six days before. But Stanton +wouldn't or couldn't tell. He leaned on his gavel through it all looking +very foolish indeed. + +These speeches of denunciation pleased the supporters of the bill +immensely, but the luxury of denouncing Stanton defeated the bill. Had +the vote been taken at the forenoon session, reconsideration would +undoubtedly have been denied. But so much time was taken in making +Stanton feel foolish, that the hour of recess arrived, and the Assembly +scattered until two o'clock. + +This brief respite gave the opponents of the measure a last opportunity. +They improved it by bringing over to their side enough members of the +San Francisco delegation to win reconsideration, and the measure's +defeat. When the Assembly re-convened after the noon recess, the members +by a vote of 43 to 34 granted the bill reconsideration, and by a vote of +37 ayes to 41 noes defeated it[95]. + +Although the Senate escaped the sensational scenes that attended the +suppression of the Japanese problem in the Assembly, nevertheless +Japanese bills and resolutions, with attending debates, made their +appearance there. Caminetti, for example, introduced a duplicate of the +Johnson anti-Japanese School bill, which was referred to the Senate +Committee on Education and never heard from again. + +Senate Bill No. 492, introduced by Senator Anthony, made more trouble. +This measure gave the people of the State an opportunity to express +themselves at the polls on the Japanese question. The Committee on +Labor, Capital and Immigration recommended the measure for passage, and +it was finally forced to a vote, being defeated by twelve votes for and +twenty-two against[96]. + +A series of Senate anti-Japanese resolutions which were finally included +in Senate joint Resolution No. 6[97], almost led to a riot in the +Assembly. After a deal of pulling and hauling in the Senate the +resolution was finally adopted and went to the Assembly. In the +Assembly, Speaker Stanton, as "a select committee of one," took the +resolution under his protection. The indications being that the "select +committee of one" would fail to report, a storm was started by an attack +on Stanton's authority to be a "select committee of one" at all. The +assailants were repulsed. Nevertheless, "the select committee of one," +after holding the measure a week, recommended that it be referred to the +Committee on Federal Relations. The measure was finally adopted and went +to the Governor. + + + +[86] The Assembly vote on the four principal Japanese issues will be +found in Table I of the Appendix. + +[87a] A bill providing funds for such a census was introduced and became +a law. + +[87] The paragraph in Governor Gillett's message which deals with the +Alien Land bill, read as follows: + +"If you believe the general policy of this State and its future +development demands that all aliens, that is, citizens of other +countries, should be discouraged in making investments here, and that no +alien should be permitted to become the owner in fee simple of any lands +within this State - agricultural, grazing or mineral, or of any city +property for the purposes of trade, commerce or manufacturing - then +enact a law forbidding the same, but see to it that it affects the +subjects of all nations alike, and that under its provisions the +citizens of Japan shall have equal privileges with those of England +and other favored nations; otherwise you might create a situation which +may prove to be embarrassing to the Federal Government. Mr. Drew's bill +might be so amended, but in its present form it clearly, as no doubt was +intended, discriminates against the citizens of China and Japan. Whether +any bill should pass at this time which will discourage foreign capital +from seeking investments in our State is a most serious question and one +not lightly to be considered. But that is a question I leave for you to +solve." + +[88] The Governor's letter was in full as follows: + +Hon. A. M. Drew: Your little note was received. + +"I am inclined to think that the best possible law that can be passed on +the question of alien ownership of land would be the law adopted by +Oklahoma. You will find it in the session laws of the State of Oklahoma, +1907 and 1908. The book is on file in the State Library. The Act is on +page 481. + +"I would strike out of the first line the words 'who is not a citizen of +the United States,' because that is useless. No alien is a citizen of +the United States, and cannot be. + +"Then I notice the second line of Section 3, instead of having 'devise,' +the word is 'device.' I suppose this must be a typographical error. + +"To this bill might be added the last section of your bill, extending +the time in which leases can be given - so many years on agricultural +property and so many years on city property. I think one year is rather +short; inasmuch as this would apply to all aliens alike, I would be +reasonable as to the length of time for which leases should be granted. + +"I am also of the opinion that President Roosevelt and Secretary Root +would agree that this bill would be all right - in fact, I have +telegrams from them which would indicate such to be the fact. Of course, +the question whether or not it would be policy to pass an alien law in +this State is something that the Legislature would have to consider, but +if such a law is to pass, as I say, I am inclined to believe that one +like the Oklahoma law would probably be the best." + +[89] Assemblyman Drew's reply to the Governor's letter suggesting that +the Oklahoma law be substituted for the original bill, was as follows: + +"Your esteemed favor of the 26th inst., is before me, and I can assure +you that I appreciate the spirit in which you have considered the Alien +Land bill, presented by myself in the Assembly. I am strictly in accord +with the changes you suggest. The words 'who is not a citizen of the +United States' are surplusage and could easily have been left out, but +they are found in both the Illinois and Oklahoma laws. I am glad the +President takes the view of the matter that he does, and you may rest +assured that I will work in harmony with yourself. However, I deem it +advisable that some law should be enacted at this session of the +Legislature. I think it will be wisdom on our part to take this step, +and surely our neighbor, Japan, cannot complain so long as the bill is +applicable to all aliens alike. I will submit to you a draft of the +amended bill as soon as I can get it in shape." + +[90] Johnson addressed himself directly to President Roosevelt and +Governor Gillett. The following paragraphs are taken at random from his +speech: + +"I expect some member of the Assembly to introduce a bill here, the +first section of which shall read: 'Before any legislation is enacted it +shall bear the approval of James N. Gillett and President Roosevelt and +if it is denied, the bill shall be withdrawn.' " + +"Some of you think legislation is like patent medicine. It must bear on +the bill, the label: 'None genuine without the note, This is a good +bill, James N. Gillett.' " + +"What right have we, mere Assemblymen, to have an opinion on any matter? +Why should we, who were sent here by the people for the sake of +convenience and formality, have any independence in our thought? What +right have we to do anything but listen in awe and reverence to the +words of wisdom that drop from the tongues of Governor James N. Gillett +and Theodore Roosevelt? + +"Of course we must surrender our individual opinion, and bow to the +superior intellects of the 'Imperial Power,' which Mr. Beardslee loves +so well. Since we must vote, as a matter of course, what right have we +to vote otherwise than as the distinguished Governor and President say +in their infinite certainty?" + +Johnson complained bitterly of the interference of the President with +the State and of the Governor with the Legislature. + +"I have," said Johnson, "all respect for the intellect of James N. +Gillett, Governor of California, and for his superior, President +Roosevelt. But I am sent into this Chamber by my constituents and not by +Governor James N. Gillett. I have been returned here again and again, +and not because I bowed to the authority of James N. Gillett. I am here +for the good of my people, the people who supported me, and who expect +me to support them. I know more about the Japanese than Governor Gillett +and President Roosevelt put together. I am not responsible to either of +them." + +"I am responsible to the mothers and fathers of Sacramento County who +have their little daughters sitting side by side in the school rooms +with matured Japs, with their base minds, their lascivious thoughts, +multiplied by their race and strengthened by their mode of life." + +"I am here to protect the children of these parents. To do all that I +can to keep any Asiatic man from mingling in the same school with the +daughters of our people. You know the results of such a condition; you +know how far it will go, and I have seen Japanese 25 years old sitting +in the seats next to the pure maids of California. I shuddered then and +I shudder now, the same as any other parent will shudder to think of +such a condition." + +[91] The purpose of the Municipal Segregation bill, as set forth in its +title, was "to confer power upon municipalities to protect the health, +morals and peace of their inhabitants by restricting undesirable, +improper and unhealthy persons and persons whose practices are dangerous +to public morals and health and peace to certain prescribed limits, and +prescribing a punishment for a violation of this Act." + +The bill in full was as follows: + +"Section 1. Whenever in the opinion of the governing body of any +municipality the presence of undesirable, improper and unhealthy +persons, or the presence of persons whose practices are dangerous to +public morals and health and peace is deemed to exist in the said +municipality and to be dangerous to the public morals and health and +peace of said municipality and its inhabitants, the said governing body +is hereby empowered to so declare by ordinance and is hereby empowered +and authorized to prescribe by ordinance the district and limits within +which said persons shall reside in said municipality, and thereafter it +shall be unlawful for any person of the class so declared to reside in +any other portion of said municipality than within the said district and +limits so fixed. + +"See. 2. A violation of the provisions of this Act shall be deemed a +misdemeanor and shall be punished as such." + +[92] "Never before have I heard of a time," said Assemblyman Cronin, +"when a Governor has sent such a message to a Legislature. I am +responsible to my constituents for my actions on this floor and I resent +such interference. I hold the Governor's action to be indiscreet. He has +no more right to send such a message to this House than have we to +dictate to the Supreme Court a policy on any action pending before it, +on the ground that the best interests of the State depend upon their +regarding our Instructions. + +"Can we dictate to the Governor the course that is to be pursued in an +executive matter? Let us stand by our guns." + +"If the men change their votes on account of this fanciful talk from the +President and the Governor," said Johnson of Sacramento, "I shall +certainly be pained and surprised. They do not know the conditions as I +know them. We have a right to protect our State, and it will not +interfere with any international relations, and they know it. Their +specious argument will not change my vote one bit. I know what The +People want - what I want. I know influence has been brought to bear. It +will be further brought to bear. Now I trust this vote will not suffer +by you men changing your minds for such groundless reasons." + +"Since yesterday," said Assemblyman Gibbons, "I have changed my views. I +thought there were three departments in this Government, but I find I +was mistaken. I recognize the error of my youthful belief. I know now +that the Legislative and the Executive are one, or, rather, that the +Executive is the Legislative." + +[93] The question has been asked - was Johnson sincere in his advocacy +of the Anti-Japanese measures? The writer does not presume to answer; +the workings of Grove L. Johnson's mind and conscience are, for the +writer at least, too intricate for analysis. But Grove L. Johnson voted +for anti-racetrack gambling bills for years, spoke for them and fought +for them as keenly as he did for the Anti-Japanese bills, always on the +losing side. But when an anti-racetrack gambling bill was before the +Assembly with some prospect of passage, Grove L. Johnson was found the +leader of those opposed to its passage. In the case in point, to Grove +L. Johnson, and not President Roosevelt or Governor Gillett, or even +Phil Stanton, is due the credit for postponement of consideration of +Assembly Bill 14, a postponement which meant its defeat. + +[94] The Transue resolution will be found in full In the appendix. + +[95] Speaker Stanton very modestly took much credit for the defeat of +the bill. The following telegram was on its way to Washington almost +before the vote had been announced: + +"Sacramento, February 10.-Theodore Roosevelt, White House Washington, D. +C. - The Assembly just reconsidered and refused passage of the Japanese +School bill. My congratulations. + + P. A. STANTON." + +The reply was as follows: + +"Washington, February 10.-Hon. P. A. Stanton, Speaker of the Assembly, +Sacramento, Cal. - Accept my heartiest thanks and congratulations for +the great service you have rendered on behalf of The People of the +United States. I thank the people of California and their +representatives in the Legislature. + + THEODORE ROOSEVELT." + +A further telegram was sent to Governor Gillett: + +"Washington, February 10. - To Governor J. N. Gillett, Sacramento Cal. - +Accept my heartiest congratulations. All good Americans appreciate what +you have done. Pray extend my congratulations individually to all who +have aided you. I feel that the way in which California has done what +was right for the Nation makes it more than ever obligatory on the +Nation in every way to safeguard the interests of California. All that I +personally can do toward this end, whether in public or private life, +shall most certainly be done. + THEODORE ROOSEVELT." + +[96] The vote on Senate Bill 492 was as follows: + +For the bill - Anthony, Black, Burnett, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, +Finn, Hartman, Holohan, Reily, Sanford, and Welch - 12. + +Against the bill - Bates, Bell, Bills, Birdsall, Boynton, Curtin, +Cutten, Hurd, Leavitt, Lewis, Martinelli, McCartney, Miller, Price, +Rush, Savage, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker, Weed, Willis, and Wright - +22. + +Absentees - Estudillo, Hare, Kennedy, Roseberry, Stetson, and Wolfe - 6. + +[97] Senate Joint Resolution No. 6, which, as finally adopted, was a +committee substitute for Senate Joint Resolution Nos. 6, 7, 11 and 17. +It follows: + +Whereas, The progress, happiness, and prosperity of the people of a +nation depend upon a homogeneous population; + +Whereas, The influx from overpopulated nations of Asia of people who are +unsuited for American citizenship or for assimilation with the Caucasian +race, has resulted and will result in lowering the American standard of +life and the dignity and wage-earning capacity of American labor; + +Whereas, The exclusion of Chinese laborers under the existing exclusion +laws of the United States has tended to preserve the economic and social +welfare of the people; + +Whereas, We view with alarm any proposed repeal of such exclusion laws +and the substituting therefor of general laws; + +Whereas, The interest of California can best be safeguarded by the +retention of said exclusion laws, and by extending their terms and +provisions to other Asiatic people; + +Whereas, The people of the Eastern states, and the United States +generally, have an erroneous impression as to the real sentiment of the +people of the Pacific Coast relative to the Asiatic question; + +Whereas, We think it right and proper that the people of this country +should be advised as to our true position on that question; therefore, +be it + +Resolved, by the Senate and Assembly jointly, That we respectfully urge +the Congress of the United States to maintain intact the present Chinese +exclusion laws and instead of taking any action looking to the repeal of +said exclusion laws, to extend the terms and provisions thereof so as to +apply to and include all Asiatics; + +Resolved, That our Senators be instructed and Representatives in +Congress requested to use all honorable means to carry out the foregoing +recommendation and requests; + +Resolved, That the Governor of California be, and he is, directed to +transmit a certified copy of these resolutions to the President and +Speaker, respectively, of the Senate and House of Representatives of the +United States, and to each of our Senators and Representatives in +Congress. + +The resolution was adopted in the Senate by the following vote: + +Ayes - Senators Anthony, Bates, Bills, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, +Burnett, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Cutten, Finn, Hare, +Hartman, Holohan, Kennedy, Leavitt, Lewis, McCartney, Miller, Reily, +Rush, Sanford, Savage, Walker, Welch, and Wolfe - 28. + +Noes - Senators Bell, Price, Roseberry, Stetson, Thompson, Weed, and +Willis - 7. + +The resolution was adopted in the Assembly on March 23. There was no +call for the ayes and noes, and no record was made of the vote. + + + +Chapter XXI. + +The Rule Against Lobbying. + +Scandals of the Session of 1907 and the Dread of Pinkerton Detectives +Led to a Rule Under Which Machine Lobbyists Could Work with Perfect +Safety, While Advocates of Reform Measures Could Be Barred From Both +Senate and Assembly. + + + +One of the principal scandals of the Legislative session of 1907 was the +openness with which machine lobbyists invaded Senate and Assembly +chamber. They went so far as to move from member to member during +roll-calls, giving Senator or Assemblyman, as the case might be, a +proprietary tap on the shoulder, to direct his vote. + +Word of the scandal got as far away from Sacramento as San Luis Obispo +County, where A. E. Campbell became a candidate for the Senate against +H. W. Lynch, largely on the machine issue. Campbell pledged himself ,to +denounce such lobbyists as Jere Burke, the Southern Pacific attorney, if +they appeared on the floor of the Senate, and to have them ejected from +the chamber. + +When Campbell reached Sacramento he let it be known that such would be +his policy. Campbell is thickset and shaggy of eyebrow; his beard shows +black on his face two hours after shaving. He has all the earmarks of a +born fighter. He didn't look good to the machine, and his words didn't +sound good. Incidentally, Jere Burke discreetly kept out of the Senate +chamber while the Senate was in session. + +Another thing which gave machine members of both Houses, as well as +machine hangers-on, much concern, was the rumor started along in +December that certain public-spirited citizens of Los Angeles and San +Francisco would maintain at the Capital during the session a lobby to +protect the interests of the people, just as the machine lobby looks +after the well-being of machine-protected corporations and individuals. + +This rumor caused great distress. It had all sorts of versions. One +story was that a corps of Pinkertons would be employed to look for bugs +in bills, boodle in sacks, and boodle-itching palms. Another account had +it that the supervision was to be carried on by the San Francisco graft +prosecution, and that Burns men would be in constant attendance. A +report, started early in the session, that a Burns detective had secured +a job as Assembly clerk almost threw that body into hysterics. + +Campbell's threats and the anti-machine lobby rumors seem to have had +their effect upon the Committee on Rules of each House. At any rate, +both Senate and Assembly adopted rules that no person engaged in +presenting any business to the Legislature or its Committees should be +permitted to do business with a member while the House to which the +member belonged was in session. Persons transgressing this rule were to +be removed from the floor of the House in which the offense was +committed, and kept out during the remainder of the session. + +The rule was employed in one instance only. George Baker Anderson, of +The People's Legislative Bureau, was ruled out of the Assembly, and, in +effect, out of the Senate Chamber. Jere Burke kept away from both, but +it was probably Campbell's threat more than the rule that influenced +Burke. With these two exceptions, the lobbyists had pretty much the run +of both chambers. It should be said, however, that while none of those +lobbyists were threatened with expulsion from the floor of either House +for advocating machine-backed measures and policies, persons advocating +reform measures were threatened with the anti-lobbying rules. But +Anderson was the only one to suffer because of them. + +The curious feature of Anderson's case was that nobody seems to have +been able to discover that he ever did any lobbying, or asked a member +of either body to support or oppose any measure or policy, or that he +even so much as spoke to a legislator while the House to which the +legislator belonged was in session. + +Anderson was in charge of a Legislative Bureau, one purpose of which was +to keep the newspapers of the State which were not represented by +correspondents at the Capital, informed of the votes on the various +measures, and other items of importance or interest. Somebody early in +the session called the bureau a "lobby," and somebody else improved the +title by calling it "People's Lobby." + +And then certain Senators and Assemblymen awoke to the startling +discovery that in the Legislative Bureau, presided over by Anderson, was +the People's Lobby that was to employ Pinkerton's or Burns' men to watch +the Legislature. Anderson was a marked man from that moment. + +Curiously enough this theory of Anderson's purpose didn't anger a single +member of Senate or Assembly who, during the nearly three months that +followed, voted against machine-advocated measures, and for measures +which the machine opposed. Assemblymen of the type of Bohnett, Hinkle, +Cattell, Callan and Drew, Senators like Bell, Black, Campbell and +Holohan either treated the Pinkerton story as a joke or thought that a +little Pinkerton watchfulness might be a pretty good proposition, all +things considered. + +On the other hand, many of the Senators and Assemblymen who were in +constant opposition to reform policies, were very much exercised that +anybody should have the audacity to have a watch kept upon the +Legislature. This intense feeling found perhaps its best expression in +Assemblyman McManus' denunciation of Anderson, when the question of +having Anderson "investigated" was before the Assembly. + +"It is a sad state of affairs," said McManus, "if a band of Pinkertons +are here to follow the members up. We aren't everyday street-car +conductors. We don't have to have spotters to watch us." + +But perhaps the most astonishing feature of the whole astonishing +Anderson incident is that nobody was ever able to connect him with a +detective of any stripe whatsoever, Burns, Pinkerton, or unclassified. +But this did not prevent his being ruled off the floor of the Assembly, +and, in effect, of the Senate. + +As the most amazing rumors about Anderson - many started as jokes[98] - +multiplied, the indignation of certain Assemblymen and Senators +increased. Matters came to a climax when Anderson sent a number of +letters to members who had been absent from the chamber when the first +vote was taken on the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill, asking them if +they would be willing to give the reasons for their absence. + +The difference in the effect of the letters was astonishing. Assemblyman +Prescott F. Cogswell, who had been favored with one of them, stated on +the floor of the Assembly that he had been glad of the opportunity to +make known the cause of his absence when the vote was taken. On the +other hand, Assemblyman Wheelan, who had received a duplicate of the +letter which Cogswell had welcomed, was very much cast down. Wheelan, +arising to a question of personal privilege, read the letter, and wanted +to know if he hadn't been "insulted[99]." + +Assemblyman Beardslee hastened to assure Mr. Wheelan that he had been. +Furthermore, Beardslee thumped his ample chest a thump, and announced: + +"I, too, am insulted, for my brother has been insulted, and who insults +my brother, insults me." + +That seemed to settle it. The Committee on Rules was instructed to +investigate the letter incident. + +The Committee on Rules consisted of Johnston of Contra Costa, Transue, +Grove L. Johnson, Beardslee and Stanton, the Committee, by the way, of +"gag rules" notoriety. The investigation was held behind closed doors. + +Anderson was asked about the letter and his purpose in writing it, to +all of which he replied directly and without hesitation. And then came +the burning question of the hour: + +"How many Pinkertons are there in your employ in Sacramento, Mr. +Anderson?" asked Johnson. + +Anderson refused to answer the question. His wiser course would perhaps +have been to answer truthfully, "None at all," and end the joke. But +that was Anderson's business. He declined to answer. + +Anderson's refusal to answer was solemnly reported by the committee back +to the Assembly. Some members when the report was read laughed, others +were made very serious indeed. It was finally decided that the +investigation of Anderson should be turned over to the Judiciary +Committee, of which Grove L. Johnson was chairman. + +The Judiciary Committee was solemnly authorized to send for persons and +papers, and administer oaths. While the investigation was pending, +Anderson was denied admittance to the Assembly chamber. As the press +badge, admitting Anderson to both Assembly and Senate chambers had been +taken from him, he was unable to enter the Senate chamber either. + +And the Assembly Judiciary Committee failed to investigate. Although +Anderson demanded that he be given a hearing, and the matter settled, +one way or the other, the Judiciary Committee would not and did not act. +Under the Assembly resolution ordering the investigation, however, +Anderson was for nearly two months barred from both the Assembly and +Senate chambers. The session closed without the investigation being +held. + +It may be said in this connection that neither in the State Statutes, +nor in the rules of either Senate or Assembly, is there a word which +prohibits the employing of detectives at a Legislative session. Even +though Johnson's committee had investigated Anderson's case, and +discovered that he was really employing detectives, it is difficult to +see how his punishment could have been justified. The incident is +certainly one of the most extraordinary of the session - of any +Legislative session ever held in this State, in fact. + +The most interesting point in the Anderson case was that when pinned +down for a reason for excluding him from the Assembly chamber, the +offended Assemblyman would invariably reply that he was excluded under +the rule which prohibited lobbying. + +Curiously enough, however, lobbying, in spite of the rule, continued on +the floors of both Houses even during sessions. + +When the Islais Creek Harbor bill was under consideration in the +Assembly, for example, Carroll Cook, and others interested in the defeat +of the measure as it had passed the Senate, appeared openly on the floor +and in the lobby of the Assembly, even when the debate was going on, and +worked for amendment of the measure to suit their aims. All this +resulted in the greatest confusion. But Speaker Stanton seemed +absolutely unable to cope with the situation. The lobbying and the +confusion continued in spite of Stanton's efforts to enforce something +of the appearance of order. + +Such scenes were often duplicated in the Senate. When the fight over the +Direct Primary bill had the Senate by the ears, Johnnie Lynch, George +Van Smith, even President of the Senate Warren Porter, exerted +themselves to compel concurrence in the machine-backed Assembly +amendments. This was done in the Senate chamber, when the Senate was in +session, and Johnnie Lynch and Van Smith in particular were conspicuous +in the work in behalf of the machine's policy. + +But it was noticeable, that those who advocated reform policies took no +such liberties on the floor of either House. They knew better. The +danger involved for the lobbyist for reform measures was emphasized the +night the measure prohibiting the sale of intoxicants within a mile and +a half of Stanford University passed the Assembly. + +Charles R. Detrick of Palo Alto, during the call of the House ordered on +account of the Stanford bill, was discussing the merits of the measure +with Assemblyman Bohnett, who was leading the fight for its passage. It +was not a case of lobbying at all, for both men were for the bill, + +Nevertheless, Assemblyman Schmitt[99a], who overheard Detrick mention +the measure, warned the Stanford man, that if he (Detrick) did not cease +his "lobbying" for the bill that he (Schmitt) would have him (Detrick) +excluded from the chamber. + +Senator Walker, although a member of the Senate, had much the same +experience. Walker was discussing the Stanford bill with a friend, when +one of the opponents of the measure threatened him with expulsion from +the floor of the Assembly if he did not desist. + +And even while these threats were being made against the proponents of +the bill, opponents of the measure were working openly on the floor of +the Assembly chamber against its passage. No suggestion was made that +the rule prohibiting lobbying be enforced against them. + + + +[98] A party of newspapermen were in Anderson's office one evening, when +two or three machine men came in. With a wink to Anderson one of the +newspapermen asked - "The head of your detective bureau is that keen +looking young fellow, with reddish brown hair and brown eyes, is he not, +Anderson?" Anderson joined in the Joke and nodded. One of the machine +men left the room immediately. Within an hour, a hunt was being made +from one end of Sacramento to the other, for a "keen-looking young man +with reddish brown hair and brown eyes." + +[99] The communication which insulted Wheelan read as follows: + +The Hon. Albert P. Wheelan, + Member of Assembly. + +Dear Sir: - + +The People's Legislative Bureau, organized chiefly for the collection +and dissemination of accurate information regarding legislation, and the +attitude of members of the Legislature thereon, notes that you are +recorded as having been absent when the roll was called on the motion to +refer the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill back to the committee. + +As our record is intended to be permanent, and will be placed in the +hands of all the newspapers and civic organizations throughout the +State, we wish to ask if you have any objection to furnishing us the +reason for your absence, so that we may enter it upon our record. +Respectfully yours, + + GEORGE B. ANDERSON, + + Secretary. + +[99a] This is the same Schmitt who objected so strenuously to professors +of the State University being identified with reform movements. + + + +Chapter XXII. + +The Machine Lobbyist At Work. + +How, Jere Burke Arrayed the County Officials of the State Against Two +Beneficial Measures - How the Power of the Southern Pacific Was Employed +Against a California Enterprise - Danger Which Constantly Menaces +Legitimate Enterprises. + + + +The problem of drawing the line between legitimate and reprehensible +lobbying has perplexed wiser men than sat in the California Legislature +of 1909. + +On the side of the lobbyist it may be said there seems no good reason +why a citizen or representative of a corporation which is interested in +pending legislation should not appear at the Capitol and in a legitimate +way present his case to the members of the Legislature. In fact, the +theory of committee consideration of measures introduced in Senate or +Assembly, is based on the principle that it is the citizen's right to be +heard on any matter that may be pending before the Legislature. The +citizen cannot be heard before either the Senate or Assembly; he can, +however, present his case to the committee the decision of which carries +weight with that branch of the Legislature for which it acts. No one can +object, for example, that Mr. P. F. Dunne appeared before the Senate +Committee on Corporations, when the Railroad Regulation bill was under +consideration, to present the railroad's side. Mr. Dunne appeared openly +and aboveboard, and although he sought deliberately to misrepresent the +situation to the Committee, nevertheless to object to his visiting +Sacramento, or even to the work which he did while there, would be +forced and far-fetched. + +In the same way, Mr. Seth Mann, representing the shippers of California, +appeared before the Committee and presented the side of the shippers. +Mr. Mann spoke for the shippers precisely as Mr. Dunne spoke for the +railroads. Mr. Mann, however, did not stoop to misrepresentation and +deception. + +But if Mr. Dunne for the railroads or Mr. Mann for the shippers had +departed from openly-presented argument to buttonhole Senators or +Assemblymen to tell them they must vote for or against a given measure, +or look out for trouble, immediately would he be open to criticism. If +either went during roll call from Legislator to Legislator to tell the +members how they were to vote, again would he be justly criticized. Or +had Mr. Dunne employed the influence of the great corporation which he +represents to defeat or pass a measure in which his company can have no +legitimate interest, again would there be good reason for complaint. Mr. +Dunne could very properly - while acting as agent of the Southern +Pacific Railroad Company - urge in a legitimate way the corporation's +objections to the Demurrage bill, to the Full Crew bill, to the Railroad +Regulation bill, or any other measure affecting common carriers. But for +Mr. Dunne to have employed the influence of his position as political +representative of a common carrier to force the passage of the Change of +Venue bill for example, or defeat an effective Direct Primary bill, or +the Party Circle bill, or the Judicial Column bill, would have been most +reprehensible, for the Southern Pacific Company can have no legitimate +interest in any of these measures. + +So far as the writer knows, Mr. Dunne did not concern himself with any +measure, except those in which his company was legitimately interested. +But paid servants of the Southern Pacific Company were at Sacramento +throughout the entire session, and managed to have their fingers in +about all that was going on. The most conspicuous of them was Mr. J. T. +Burke, more familiarly known as "Jere" Burke. + +A fair sample of Burke's methods - and Burke is merely typical of the +objectionable lobbyist - is found in the campaign which was carried on +against Senate Bills 1229 and 1230. Had these measures become laws, it +would have been possible for county assessors to discover property, +owned principally by public service corporations, which at present +escapes taxation. It is estimated that the total taxable value of this +untaxed property is $100,000,000. It is not taxed because assessors have +no means of reaching it. Mr. Burke's company could have no legitimate +interest in Senate Bills 1229 and 1230. This statement is made, of +course, on the assumption that the officials of the Southern Pacific +Company aim to make honest returns to the tax collector. But to return +to Senate Bills 1229 and 1230, and Burke's connection with them. + +The two measures were intended to amend sections of the Codes relating +to the assessment of property. Section 3681 of the Political Code +provides that "during the session of the Board (of Supervisors sitting +as a Board of Equalization) it may direct the Assessor to assess any +taxable property that has escaped assessment, or to add to the amount, +number and quality of property, when a false or incompetent list has +been rendered." + +Under this section, as it at present reads, the Supervisors may direct +the Assessor to assess property that may have escaped assessment, but +there is no machinery provided by which the property may be discovered. +Senate Bill 1229 provided the machinery by which the unassessed property +might be discovered, by adding to the section quoted above: "And the +Board (the Supervisors sitting as a Board of Equalization) may employ +legal or other assistance in discovering any taxable property that has +escaped assessment in the performance of their duties under this +section." + +Senate Bill 1230, the companion bill, provided that the Supervisors may +subpena witnesses in all matters pending before them when sitting as a +Board of Equalization. Under the present law, they can compel attendance +of witnesses only upon the particular point under consideration. + +The necessity of the amendments was generally admitted. The task of the +Assessor is at best no easy one. Through his deputies he must list all +the property in his county - that he can find. + +The holdings of the small property owners are in sight, and, down to the +last chicken, go on the assessment roll. + +The property of the large corporation is not so readily discovered and +$100,000,000 worth of it, according to conservative estimate, escapes +assessment. The Assessors, with comparatively small force of deputies, +have no way to force its assessment. + +The Board of Supervisors, sitting as a Board of Equalization, may know +that the unassessed property is in existence, but has no way to reach +it. The Board may, under section 3681 of the Political Code quoted +above, direct the Assessor to assess it, but the law stops there. There +is no machinery provided for the discovery of the property. Senate Bills +1229 and 1230 provided the machinery. They were introduced by Senator +Sanford of Mendocino. Before their significance was appreciated by +Southern Pacific lobbyists, the Senate Judiciary Committee had +recommended them for passage. + +When Burke did grasp the significance of the measures, he demanded of +Sanford that they be withdrawn. The argument which Burke advanced +against them was in effect as follows: + +"These bills are the most un-American propositions I ever heard of," +said Burke. "They make of the Boards of Supervisors inquisitorial +bodies. The corporations have property which they prefer to conceal. +They prefer arbitrary assessments. They do not care to make returns to +the Assessor. The passage of these bills would compel them to make +returns." + +In other words, the corporations, if Jere Burke, their legislative +representative, reflects their sentiments, prefer that the Assessors +continue to guess at the value of their properties. If the guess be too +high, the corporations can compel reductions; if the guess be too low, +they rest content. But, however the corporations may approve the +guessing method of assessment, it has not proved equable, has not been +fair to the farmer, the merchant and the householder, who under oath +make honest returns to the Assessor. + +Burke's argument, however, failed to move Sanford. The Senator from +Mendocino refused to withdraw the bills. And then a curious thing +happened. The members of the Senate were, within three days after +Sanford had refused to withdraw the bills, fairly swamped with telegrams +and letters from County Assessors and County Supervisors, protesting +against the passage of the bills, on the ground that their passage would +be a reflection upon the County Assessors of the State. Many who thus +telegraphed or wrote, stated that they had not seen the bills but added +in effect, "We understand that they are bad bills and should be +defeated." + +Of course, there was no evidence that Burke or his agents had instigated +the telegrams. But there was a shrewd suspicion that such was the case. +Sanford's answer to the Supervisors and Assessors was most effective. He +mailed them copies of the Sacramento Bee which set forth the actual +purpose of the bills, and copies of the bills themselves. Immediately +Assessors and Supervisors who had wired their Senators to oppose the +bills, sent telegrams withdrawing their opposition. + +In passing it may be said that neither bill passed the Senate. Bill No. +1229 passed second reading, but was amended on third reading, March 11, +and was not heard of again. Bill No. 1230 passed second reading, but was +not read the third time. There are other ways to kill good bills than to +bluff their authors into withdrawing them, or by stirring up State-wide +antagonism to them. The incident shows, however, the State-wide +ramifications of the machine. Within three days it was possible for the +machine to create the impression from one end of the State to the other, +that Senate Bills 1229 and 1230 were bad bills, measures casting +reflection upon the County Assessors. Only the prompt action of Senator +Sanford dispelled this impression. It also demonstrates the powerful +backing behind the machine agents kept at Sacramento during a +Legislative session. + +It is bad enough when the far-reaching influence of the machine is +employed to defeat measures which provide the machinery to enable public +officials to enforce the law, against beneficiaries of the system, but +when one of the agents employs this influence to promote his personal +interests in a matter in which the particular corporation which he +represents can have no interest whatever, particular emphasis is given +the evils of the machine domination and reprehensible lobbying. To +illustrate: + +A peculiar situation which has developed at Owens Lake in Inyo County, +made it necessary and proper that slight amendment be made to the law of +eminent domain. The water of Owens Lake is heavily charged with soda. +Some years ago, the Inyo Development Company was organized to recover +this soda. The company invested $200,000 in establishing a soda-ash +plant at the lakeside. This does not include the cost of building a +railroad from the Lake to Mound House, Nevada, a distance of about 400 +miles. The investment proved a success. The company harvests as high as +10,000 tons of soda ash a year. As the product is worth as high as $30 a +ton at San Francisco, the enterprise adds an important industry to the +developed resources of the State. The method of recovering the soda is +simple. The water is drawn from the lake into vats, where it is left to +evaporate. The soda is then recovered. + +Owing to the fact that the waters of Owens Lake are constantly receding, +a considerable strip of land has, during recent years, been uncovered +between the company's holdings near the lake. and the water. The water +from which the soda is reclaimed has to be piped over this land. + +Recently former employees of the Inyo Development Company took up the +land lying between the company's property and the lake, and under the +name of the Natural Soda Products Company, propose to go into the +business of manufacturing soda ash on their own account. + +Not long since the new company began to complain of the old company's +pipe, which crosses the new company's land. The old company saw that it +had trouble ahead unless it could condemn a strip of the recently +reclaimed land for a pipe line. It was found, however, that there is no +law in California by which this could be done. Under the law of eminent +domain land could be condemned for almost any other purpose than to +establish a pipe line to carry water not to be used for irrigation or +domestic purposes. An attempt was therefore made to have the law +governing eminent domain amended so as to read that land could be +condemned "for oil pipe lines and pipe lines for conducting the waters +of any lake which are not fit for irrigation or domestic purposes, and +which contain soda or other minerals' or chemical substances in +solution, and also pumps and machinery for raising the same and forcing +the same through such pipes." + +This amendment was included in Senate Bill 797, and in the companion +Assembly Bill 815. Senate Bill 797 passed the Senate and was referred to +the Judiciary Committee of the Assembly, where the amendment providing +for the soda water pipe line was added. This bill received a favorable +recommendation from the Assembly Judiciary Committee and was returned to +the Assembly. And then a very mysterious thing happened. Without +apparent reason the bill was referred to the Assembly Committee on +Corporations. Provision for soda water pipe lines, so far as the +Assembly was concerned, came to a sudden ending. + +At the time Senate Bill 797 was undergoing suppression in the Assembly, +the companion bill, Assembly Bill 815, was pending before the Senate +Judiciary Committee. The measure was amended to make possible the +condemnation of land for a soda water pipe line. Chairman Willis of the +Committee expressed himself as satisfied with the amendment. And as +amended, the bill was referred back to the Senate with the +recommendation that it do pass as amended. Two days later, however, +Senator Willis stated on the floor of the Senate that he had information +from Inyo County which convinced him that the amendment was not +desirable, and should be excluded from the bill. He stated that the +county officials of Inyo County opposed the amendment, and for that +reason suggested that the amendment be dropped. He stated that the +Assembly would refuse to concur in the amendment even though the bill +were passed with it. Mr. Willis' wishes were respected and the bill +re-amended. Provisions for condemning land for soda water pipe lines +came to as dead a stop in the Senate as in the Assembly. The next +development in this comparatively unimportant incident of the session, +was the discovery that Mr. J. T. Burke of Berkeley, member of the +Southern Pacific law department, the Jere Burke of Southern Pacific +lobbying, is one of the directors of the Natural Soda Products Company, +which owns the land over which the Inyo Development Company would build +a pipe line, a pipe line upon which the future prosperity of the Inyo +Development Company largely rests. Burke was alleged to have opposed the +amendment - and so far as the writer knows the charge was never denied - +and with having brought about the defeat of the amendment. In other +words, Mr. Burke is charged with throwing the full weight of the +influence of the large corporation (the Southern Pacific Railroad +Company, which he represents) on the side of a small corporation in +which he is a director, and against a third corporation, which has large +interests at stake. And the citizen who stands for fair play should not +lose sight of the fact that Mr. Burke's corporation, the Southern +Pacific Railroad Company, is the principal factor in the machine which +works against good government, fair play, the "square deal" in business +and politics which President Roosevelt insisted upon. The Inyo +Development Company failed in its perfectly legitimate purpose because +arrayed against it was in effect the political influence of the Southern +Pacific Railroad Company, the tenderloin, and all the other elements +that go to make up the political machine in California. And the fact +should not be lost sight of that no other independent enterprise in +California, even where it has, as has the Inyo Development Company, +hundreds of thousands of dollars invested, is immune against similar +experiences. + +Early in the session when the lobbying question was, because of the +excitement over Anderson, decidedly prominent, Sanford in the Senate and +Callan in the Assembly introduced bills requiring lobbyists who appear +at the Capitol during a legislative session to register their names, the +names of their employers and the amount and nature of their compensation. +At the close of the session they were, under the terms of the measures, +required to file a detailed statement of their expenditures. + +Had these measures become laws they might have proved very embarrassing +to certain gentlemen who were very well received by the machine element +in both Senate and Assembly chamber. + +But they didn't become laws. + +The Assembly bill went to the Assembly Judiciary Committee, which held +it two months, finally, on March 16th, reporting it to the Assembly +without recommendation. On March 19th, the measure was refused passage. + +The Senate bill went to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Committee +referred it back to the Senate with the recommendation that it do not +pass. On January 29th, it, too, was defeated. + +The lobbying problem, like Jere Burke, continues with us. + + + +Chapter XXIII. + +Influence of the San Francisco Delegation. + +Casts Nearly Twenty-five Per Cent of the Vote in Each House - Majority +Invariably Found on the Side of the Machine - Opposed Passage of the +Walker-Otis Bill - Instrumental in Amending the Direct Primary Law - +Defeated Local Option Bill. + + + +The popular idea that the State outside San Francisco is not concerned +about political conditions at the metropolis is not borne out by the +record of the legislative session of 1909. The San Francisco delegations +in Senate and Assembly had, as they always have had and will have for +many a year to come, the deciding voice in practically all important +issues. + +San Francisco elects within one of 25 per cent of the members of the +State Senate, and within two of 25 per cent of the Assembly. In other +words, nine of the forty Senators come from San Francisco, and eighteen +of the eighty Assemblymen. The nine San Francisco Senators and the +eighteen San Francisco Assemblymen join with the outside members in +making laws not for San Francisco alone, but for the entire State. Their +numbers give them decided advantage. The character of the laws passed at +a legislative session almost invariably bears the stamp of the character +of the San Francisco delegation. The character of the delegation depends +upon political conditions at San Francisco. The whole State, then, is +concerned in the efforts of the best citizenship of the metropolis to +oust from power the corrupt element that has so long dominated San +Francisco politics. + +The record of the San Francisco delegation at the session of 1909, while +better in the Assembly than in the Senate, is not one for San Francisco +- or the State for that matter - to enthuse over. The votes on test +questions of the eighteen members of the Assembly and of the nine +members of the Senate, will be found set forth in tables in the +appendix. + +The table showing the votes of the nine San Francisco Senators covers +sixteen roll calls, on which the San Francisco Senators cast 128 votes, +ninety-nine of which were in support of machine policies and only +twenty-nine against. Thus the nine Senators averaged on sixteen roll +calls, eleven votes for the machine and three votes against. Had the San +Francisco Senators broken even on the issues involved; that is to say, +had sixty-four of the 128 votes been cast for the machine, and +sixty-four against the machine, and the sixty-four anti-machine votes +been evenly distributed among the several issues, the machine would have +been defeated on every issue coming before the Senate. + +The Assembly showing is not quite so overwhelmingly machine as that of +the Senate, but it is bad enough. Eleven roll calls are considered. On +these the eighteen San Francisco Assemblymen cast a total of 165 votes, +of which 108 were for machine policies and fifty-seven against. Thus, +even in the Assembly, the vote was approximately 2 to 1 in favor of the +machine. Of the fifty-seven anti-machine votes, eleven were cast by +Callan, who made an absolutely clean record, nine by Gerdes and seven by +Lightner, a total of twenty-seven for the three. Deducted from the total +of anti-machine votes, this leaves only thirty anti-machine votes for +the remaining fifteen members of the delegation. Or to put it the other +way, Callan, Gerdes and Lightner cast among them only four machine +votes, which leaves 104 machine votes cast by the other fifteen San +Francisco members. + +On the individual issues the San Francisco Senators and Assemblymen made +as bad a showing as does their vote in the aggregate. The passage of the +Walker-Otis Racetrack Gambling bill for example demonstrates that the +poolsellers had little hold upon the legislators of any community of the +State outside of San Francisco. In the Senate but seven votes were cast +against the bill. Five of the seven came from the San Francisco +delegation - Finn, Hare, Hartman, Reily and Wolfe. The two remaining +came from Alameda and Shasta-Siskiyou Counties. Leavitt, representing +Alameda, and Weed, representing Shasta and Siskiyou, voted with the five +San Francisco Senators against suppressing bookmaking and pool-selling. + +The record of the San Francisco Assembly delegation on the anti-gambling +measure is scarcely less suggestive. Before the Walker-Otis bill could +pass the Assembly the proponents of the measure had to win six fights, +as is shown by the table giving the several votes taken in the Assembly +on the Walker-Otis bill. The three most important of the six were: + +1. To prevent the bill being referred back to the Committee on Public +Morals. + +2. To pass the measure on third reading without amendment. + +3. To prevent reconsideration of the vote by which the bill had been +passed. + +In the first fight twenty-three Assemblymen voted to refer the bill back +to the Committee. Of these twelve - more than one-half - were from San +Francisco. + +The day of the second fight, only ten Assemblymen voted on the side of +the gamblers. Every one of the ten was from San Francisco. + +In the third fight, on the motion to reconsider, nineteen Assemblymen +voted for reconsideration. Of these, ten, more than fifty per cent, were +from San Francisco. + +Or, to put it in a lump, in the three most important fights over the +Walker-Otis bill in the Assembly, in the aggregate fifty-two votes were +cast against the measure. Of these, thirty-two were from San Francisco +Assemblymen. Only twenty were from outside San Francisco. + +The universal demand throughout the State for the passage of an +anti-pool selling measure offset the influence and the vote of the San +Francisco delegation in both Senate and Assembly. But in the issues more +involved, where the lines were more closely drawn, San Francisco +practically made the laws for the whole State. This could be +demonstrated by many instances. The most striking perhaps are shown by +the histories of the Direct Primary measure and the Railroad Regulation +bills. + +When the first fight over the Direct Primary bill came up in the Senate, +it will be remembered, the anti-machine forces defeated the machine by a +vote of twenty-seven to thirteen. Of the thirteen Senators who voted to +amend the bill to the liking of Wolfe and Leavitt, six - almost fifty +per cent - were from San Francisco. They were Finn, Hare, Hartman, +Kennedy, Reily, Wolfe. + +When the machine element had succeeded in amending the Direct Primary +measure to its liking in the Assembly and there came a new alignment on +the bill in the Senate, eight of the nine San Francisco Senators voted +with Wolfe and Leavitt for the amendments, which denied the people of +California State-wide vote on candidates for the United States Senate. +One San Francisco Senator only, Anthony, voted with the better element +in the Senate, against the amendments. + +Had only two of the nine Senators from San Francisco voted for the bill +in its original form, the measure would have been passed by a vote of +twenty-one to nineteen without the machine amendments. + +The influence of the San Francisco members in shaping the Direct Primary +law was even more forcibly illustrated in the Assembly. Of the eighteen +San Francisco Assemblymen, fifteen voted for the Assembly amendments, +two, Callan and Gerdes, voted against them, and Hopkins is not recorded +as voting. + +It will be remembered that the amendments were read into the bill by a +vote of thirty-six to thirty-eight. Had the San Francisco delegation +divided even on this vote, had nine voted for the amendments and nine +against, the vote would have been forty-three against putting them in +the bill, and thirty-two for, the bill would not have been amended in +the Assembly; it would have become a law in the same shape that it had +originally passed the Senate. It is noticeable that in an Assembly of +eighty members, only twenty-three of the Assemblymen who voted for the +Assembly amendments to the Direct Primary bill were from outside San +Francisco. In the Senate eight of the twenty Senators who voted for the +amendments were from San Francisco, only twelve were from outside that +city. Thus, out of 120 members in the Legislature, ninety-three of whom +were from outside San Francisco, only thirty-five from districts outside +the metropolis voted for the Assembly, or machine amendments to the +Direct Primary bill. But twenty-three of the twenty-seven San Francisco +Senators and Assemblymen did vote for them, and only three of the San +Francisco members voted against them. + +It will be seen that the people of California who live outside San +Francisco are decidedly interested in the character of Senators and +Assemblymen whom that city sends to the Legislature. + +The people of San Francisco are, of course, as much concerned over +reasonable regulation of the transportation companies as Californians +living outside that city. But the San Francisco Senators were a unit in +their opposition to the passage of an effective railroad regulation +measure. + +The fight over the railroad regulation came in the Senate. The final +line-up showed eighteen Senators for the effective Stetson bill and +against the ineffective Wright bill; while twenty-two Senators were +against the Stetson bill and for the Wright bill. The Wright bill was +accordingly passed. Every one of the nine San Francisco Senators voted +for the Wright bill. Only thirteen Senators who voted for the Wright +bill were from outside San Francisco. + +In a word, the proponents of the Stetson bill were from the start +handicapped by a solid delegation of nine from San Francisco which they +could not overcome. Had three of the nine San Francisco Senators been +for the Stetson bill, that measure would now be the law of California. + +The transportation issue was fought out in the Assembly over the Sanford +Senate resolution endorsing Bristow's plan to establish a line of +Government steamers between San Francisco and Panama. The fruit growers +of Southern California are particularly interested in this project. The +Assembly, however, amended all reference to the Bristow report and all +criticism of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company and the railroads out of +the resolution. + +Of the eighteen San Francisco Assemblymen only one, Callan, voted +against the amendments; fourteen - Beatty, Beban, Coghlan, Collum, +Cullen, Hopkins, Lightner, Macauley, McManus, Nelson, O'Neil, Pugh, +Perine and Wheelan - voted for the amendments, while three - Black, +Gerdes and Schmitt - did not vote at all. + +The Local Option bill was also killed by San Francisco votes. This +measure was strongly backed by the rural districts. The various +counties, particularly those engaged in farming, dairying and fruit +growing, sent representatives to the Legislature instructed to vote for +Local Option. The issue in all ways concerned the country districts +rather than the large cities. But the votes of the San Francisco +Senators defeated the Local Option bill. + +The first fight over the Local Option bill came when in the ordinary +course of events it reached third reading. Instead of letting a vote be +taken on the measure, Wolfe moved that it be referred to the Judiciary +Committee. This was clearly a move against the passage of the bill, for +it meant delay which might prove fatal. But Wolfe's motion prevailed by +a vote of twenty to fifteen. The nine San Francisco Senators voted to +refer the bill to the committee, only eleven Senators from outside San +Francisco voted with them. + +The nine members from San Francisco continued consistent in their +opposition to the measure. When the Local Option bill did come to a vote +their nine votes were cast against it. + +The people of Del Norte county and the people of San Diego county are +denied the privilege of voting "Wet or dry" because of the opposition to +the Local Option bill of the solid San Francisco delegation in the +Senate. It will be seen that the people of these distant counties are +decidedly interested in political conditions in San Francisco, for in a +large way the character of the San Francisco delegation in the +Legislature is unmistakably reflected in the laws which are passed for +the government of the entire State. + +Taken as a whole, the San Francisco delegation in Senate and Assembly +were nothing for that city to be proud of, and at a critical moment San +Francisco came near paying dearly for her Hartmans, Hares, Macauleys and +McManuses. But for the intervention of the country members the Islais +Creek bond project would have been defeated. + +The improvement calls for the purchase of sixty-three water blocks at +Islais Creek to be converted into an inland harbor. The future +development of San Francisco depends largely upon this improvement. But +private interests demanded that nineteen of the sixty-three blocks be +excluded from the plan, which would have rendered the whole project +impracticable. When the fight came on, San Francisco Senators and +Assemblymen opposed the purchase of the sixty-three blocks. + +To begin with, Senator Wolfe, as member of the State Harbors Committee, +had signed a report which recommended that forty-four blocks only be +purchased. But Wolfe afterwards insisted that he had signed the report +not knowing what he was doing. + +When the fight for the improvement came up in the Senate, only two +Senators, Hartman and Reily, both of San Francisco, opposed the project. +They were in the end ignominiously defeated, every Senator present +voting against them. But both Hartman and Reily did the best they knew +how to defeat the purchase of the area necessary for the improvement. + +The San Francisco delegation in its opposition to the Islais Creek +project had better success in the Assembly. Nine San Francisco +Assemblymen, Beban, Black, Cullen, Lightner, Macauley, McManus, O'Neil, +Perine and Wheelan, united against the measure as it had passed the +Senate. They succeeded in throwing doubt upon the necessity of the +purchase of sixty-three blocks, and finally won twenty-two outside +members over to their way of thinking. Had it not been for the efforts +of Assemblymen Callan, Beatty and Nelson of San Francisco, backed by the +Los Angeles delegation, the Islais Creek Harbor project would +unquestionably have been defeated in the Assembly, solely because of the +opposition of nine San Francisco Assemblymen. + +But there is plenty of evidence of improved political conditions at San +Francisco. An anti-machine Board of Supervisors is standing out manfully +against the demands of machine-protected interests. The District +Attorney's office is, indeed, pressing representatives of those +interests pretty close to the doors of the penitentiary, although the +District Attorney is handicapped by laws for which San Francisco is +largely responsible, because of the character of the men whom session +after session she has sent to the Legislature. + +There is, however, enough to warrant the belief that San Francisco will +improve the character of the Assembly and Senate delegation. Upon such +improvement, the well-being of the whole State largely depends. + + + +Chapter XXIV. + +Attacks On And Defense of the Fish Commission + +Fast Becoming a Powerful Political Factor - Enormous Fund Which It +Expends Practically Without Check. - Legislative Investigation Blocked - +Scheme to Give Commissioners Salary Fails. + + + +Without the general public realizing just what is going on, the machine +is, in the State Fish and Game Commission, building up an adjunct which +seems destined to play an important part in any fight that may be +carried on by the independent electors to break the machine's +strangle-hold upon the State. Naturally the machine element in the +Legislature was prepared always to rally to the defense of the +Commission, and the defense was necessary, for the Commission is +vulnerable, and was attacked at many points. + +The Commission is perhaps the most extraordinary institution in the +State. At its head is General George Stone, one-time chairman of the +Republican State Central Committee. At its tail is Jake Steppacher, +another one-time potent politician who has passed the days of his +usefulness. Between Stone at the lead and Steppacher at the tail, is an +astonishing array of formerly prominent politicians, as well as +politicians who are decidedly in the present. In fact, the Fish and Game +Commission is fast becoming one of the most potent adjuncts to the State +political machine, that strictly non-partisan organization which guards +the interests of the tenderloin, the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, +the racetrack gamblers, their associates and allies, and which rather +presumptuously assumes to be the Republican Party of California. + +One of the features of the session of 1909 was the keen little fight of +the anti-machine members of the Legislature to restore the Fish and Game +Commission to its one-time simplicity, legitimacy and usefulness, and +the efforts of the machine members to prevent this. + +Up to two years ago, under the name of Fish Commission, the now Fish and +Game Commission did most admirable work on an allowance of about +$50,000. So far as the writer can ascertain, the Commission's income up +to 1907 never exceeded $54,000 in any one year; usually it was a trifle +under $50,000. + +But in 1907 a tax of $1 a year was imposed upon all citizens of +California who wished to go hunting. Citizens of other States, wishing +to hunt in California, are under the same law taxed $10 a year, while +foreigners are taxed $25. The law provides that the income thus raised +be turned over to the Fish Commission. + +The first year that the law was in force, the Commission received +$116,579 on account of it. This, with moneys received from State +appropriations, fines collected and the like, swelled the Commission's +income for that year, the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908, to +$184,467.70, an increase of more that $130,000 from the previous fiscal +year. + +For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908, the cost of conducting the +Governor's office, including the Governor's salary, the salaries of his +secretaries and clerks, stationery, postage stamps, secret service, +everything in a word in connection with the office, was $32,377. + +In the same way the expense of conducting the State Controller's office +was $23,417; of the State Treasurer's office, $16,751 ; of the Attorney +General's office, $33,082; of the Surveyor General's office, $20,679; of +the State Superintendent of Schools' office, $22,380. + +But the General Stone captained - or perhaps generaled - Fish Commission +had for that year a modest bit of $184,467. The Fish Commission then, +for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908, cost California almost six +times as much as did the Governor's office, eight times as much as did +the Controller's office, eleven times as much as did the State +Treasurer's office, almost six times as much as did the Attorney +General's office, more than nine times as much as the Surveyor General's +office, and eight times as much as did the State Department of Public +Instruction. And let it be borne in mind that this does not include the +sums which the various counties paid for game wardens and for local +protection of game, the best protection, by the way, and the most +practical. + +The $184,467, did not go to the counties. It went exclusively to General +Stone's Commission. It will be seen that General Stone's Commission has +a very good thing of it. + +Another surprising feature of the Stone-Generaled Commission is that +there is little check upon its expenditures. If the Governor wishes to +raise the salary of his secretary or one of his stenographers he must +appeal to the Legislature for permission. The State Controller, the +State Treasurer, the Secretary of State, the State superintendent of +Schools, and so on down the list Of State officials, are powerless to +increase the salary of an assistant or of a clerk, or of an office boy, +without legislative sanction. + +But not so General Stone's Commission. The Commission is left to do +pretty much as it pleases with its income. So, recently, without saying +a word to anybody, it increased the salary of one of its deputies +(Vogelsang) from $200 to $300 a month. Three hundred dollars a month is +$3600 a year. Up to this year the salary of the State Controller, of the +Secretary of State, of the State Treasurer, of the Surveyor General, of +the Superintendent of Public Instruction, etc., was only $3,000 a year. +So it will be seen that one of General Stone's Deputies was drawing $600 +a year more salary from the State than the elected State officials. + +Jake Steppacher and other politicians, finding easy berths in the +Commission, were also granted generous salary increases. + +But in ways other than generous increase in the salaries of its deputies +has the Fish Commission shown its kingly independence. The law provides +that each State official and Commission shall, biennially, in the +September before the Legislature convenes, file with the Governor a +report of its activities and expenditures. This enables the Governor to +make such recommendations as he may deem necessary in his message to the +Legislature. The Controller, Attorney General, in fact all the State +officials and departments, observed the law last September with but one +exception. The Fish Commission, costing the State from six to eleven +times more money that the State departments, did not file a report with +the Governor. + +The fact that the Commission had filed no report in September, the +generous increase in salaries of its deputies, alleged instances of +arbitrary conduct of its representatives, resulted in a resolution being +introduced by Assemblyman Harry Polsley, demanding that the Commission +be made the subject of legislative inquiry. + +The resolution was referred to the Assembly Committee on Fish and Game, +a committee notoriously in sympathy with the Commission. The Committee +held a sort of preliminary hearing which resulted in a general +whitewashing[100]. Polsley made out what was generally regarded as a +prima facie case against the Commission, but the Committee did not +choose to consider it such, and so the investigation got no +further[100a]. + +But it was noticeable after the "preliminary hearing" that the advocates +of the Fish Commission measures did not show up so sprightly confident +of their passage as before. Polsley's efforts were by no means lost. +Many measures intended to strengthen the already gigantically strong +Commission failed of passage, or had their viciousness amended out of +them, which, had it not been for Polsley's efforts, might have become +laws. + +The most important of these was Senate Bill 741. The measure as +originally introduced by Senator Willis provided that "every person in +the State of California, who hunts, pursues or kills any of the wild +birds or animals, excepting predatory birds or animals, or fishes for +or catches with hook and line any of the protected fish of this State, +without first procuring a license therefor, as provided in this Act, +is guilty of a misdemeanor." + +Had the act become a law as introduced, not only those who hunt, but +those who fish, would have been obliged to pay one dollar for a license. +Thus, if a family of father, mother and three children wanted to go +fishing, they would first have had to pay five dollars for the +privilege. + +The writer has it from a gentleman who has made careful study of the +Fish Commission and its ways that the licensing of amateur fishers would +have increased the income of the Fish and Game Commission $150,000 a +year. This, with the income already enjoyed by the Commission of +$184,000 a year, would have swelled its annual income to more than +$330,000. This sum is $90,000 more than it cost to maintain the Stockton +Hospital for the Insane for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908; +$125,000 more than the maintenance of the Agnews Asylum for that year; +$122,000 more than the cost of the maintenance of the Folsom State +Prison. The Fish and Game Commission was scarcely modest in its +demands[101]. + +Naturally, the backers of the Fish and Game Commission made a hard fight +for the measure's passage. But in spite of their efforts they could not +edge it through the Senate until March 3d. In the Assembly, the measure +met genuine opposition. + +The Assembly Committee on Fish and Game of course recommended it for +passage, and on March 15th, after a hot fight, it actually passed the +Assembly. But Cattell gave notice of reconsideration. Incidentally, +Governor Gillett let it be known that he would veto any measure that +required amateur fishermen to pay license. This was a damper upon the +Fish Commission crowd. When Cattell called the bill up for +reconsideration it was reconsidered and defeated. However, Leeds +accepted an amendment which struck out the clause which provided that +amateur fishermen must pay a license tax. On Leeds' motion the next day, +the amended bill was reconsidered and passed. + +The three Fish and Game Commissioners serve without salary. Their +compensation comes from the pleasure of disbursing upwards of $200,000 a +year, what political prestige there may be in it, and rather generous +expense money[102]. But a bill was introduced to give each Commissioner +a salary of $3,000 a year. The measure did not become law, for which the +writer believes much credit is due Assemblymen Polsley of Red Bluff. The +State was thus saved $9,000 a year. General Stone and his associates are +just that amount out of pocket. They have, however, given no indication +of resigning their offices because the salary has been denied them. + +But if the Fish and Game Commission was unsuccessful in increasing its +revenue and putting through other measures from the standpoint of its +members advantageous, its opponents were quite as unsuccessful in their +attacks upon the Commission. Like the panther cat that guards her young, +the agents of the Commission fought to retain the advantages which they +had secured in 1907, and were generally successful. + +The chief of the attacks was that of Assemblyman Polsley, author of +Assembly Bill 433. This bill wasn't very long, contained less than five +lines, in fact, and just forty-three words, but its passage would have +saved the people of California more than $100,000 a year, or almost as +much as it costs the State to run the Governor's office, the +Controller's office, the State Treasurer's office and the office of +State Superintendent of Schools combined. Assembly Bill 433 repealed the +law of 1907, under which hunters are required to pay the Fish and Game +Commission for the privilege of going hunting. The bill was introduced +January 15th. It was referred to the notorious Assembly Committee on +Fish and Game. There it was held until March 10th. It was then referred +back to the Assembly with the recommendation that it "do not pass." That +settled Assembly Bill 433. + +Another measure which caused the agents of the Fish Commission much +worry was introduced in the Assembly by Preston and in the Senate by +Sanford. This bill provided that $50,000 should be paid out of the Fish +and Game Commission fund each year to be used in paying bounties for +exterminating coyotes. This would have left the Commission only about +$130,000 a year. Naturally, the agents of the Commission resented the +raid on their funds. The measure was referred to the Assembly Committee +on Fish and Game. This was on January 18th. And it never was heard of +after. + +The companion Senate measure, introduced by Sanford, got further, but +not much. The Senate Committee reported it "without recommendation." But +even so, it passed second reading and went to engrossment and third +reading. There it languished. On March 18th it was withdrawn by its +author. + +Another measure which gave the Commissioners a deal of worry was one +introduced by Johnson of Placer, which provided that to each hunter who +took fifty blue jay heads to the County's Clerk's office should be +issued a hunter's license free. It was thought that this would encourage +boys to kill blue jays for the hunter's license prize, value one dollar. +But General Stone could not see it that way. + + "If this bill becomes a law," said General Stone, "we shall have to +retrench somewhere." + +The bill didn't become a law, and the Fish and Game Commission was +saved. + +But the most "unkindest cut of all" came when the Assembly attempted to +break into that sacred Fish and Game Commission fund by way of +resolution. The Assembly actually adopted a resolution calling for a +Commission to be appointed by the Governor for the purpose of +ascertaining the feasibility of dividing the State into game districts, +and generously providing $5,000 out of the Fish Commission fund for that +purpose. Naturally the agents of the Fish Commission were scandalized at +this proposed reckless expenditure of moneys from their fund by somebody +else. But they were powerless. The resolution went through. + +Rather late in the session the Assembly discovered that under the law it +cannot "resolute" money out of any fund other than the Assembly +contingent fund. The resolution was not, therefore, worth the paper it +was printed on. Once again the sacred Fish Commission fund was saved. + +But the Assembly could switch money out of the fund by legislative +enactment, and a bill covering the same ground as the resolution was +introduced without delay. + +The measure passed the Assembly but did not reach the Senate until March +22d, two days before adjournment. That was very late for such a measure, +but a heroic effort was made to secure its passage. + +On Estudillo's motion, an attempt was made to suspend the State +Constitution, declare the bill a matter of special urgency, and pass it +forthwith. But the motion failed. Again did the Fish Commission escape a +raid on its fund. + +Senator Walker and Assemblyman Rutherford introduced measures providing +for a distribution of the fund with counties, which at any rate looked +pretty good to the counties, although the agents of the Fish Commission +were not pleased at all. + +The bills provided that one-half of the moneys collected from the sale +of hunters' licenses, and on account of fines for infringement of the +State game laws, should be paid to the counties in which collected, and +the balance go to the Fish Commission fund. + +Walker's bill was introduced on January 8th. It went to the Senate +Committee on Fish and Game and was never heard of after. + +Rutherford's bill was introduced on January 15th. It went to the +Assembly Committee on Fish and Game. Like the Walker bill, the +Rutherford bill was lost in committee oblivion. + +Such, from the standpoint of the more important bills to increase and to +decrease the Fish Commission fund, was the record of fish and game +legislation. The Fish and Game Commission - and its overgrown fund - is +still with us. But it might have been infinitely worse. Bad little boys +who play hookey from Sunday-school to go fishing, for example, might +have - in addition to the other frightful penalties imposed on them - +been compelled to pay a license tax of $1 for the privilege. + + + +[100] That the Fish and Game Committee would whitewash the Commission +was recognized from the first. Even members of the machine who stand for +genuine game protection objected to this committee making the +investigation. When the motion was made to refer the resolution to this +committee, Assemblyman Greer of Sacramento, took the floor to protest: + +"It is useless to refer the matter to the Committee on Fish and Game," +said Greer, "for we all know what that committee will do. We'll get no +action there. Let it go to some committee that will give it +consideration." + +[100a] The Fish and Game Commission was very bitter against Polsley and +all who approved his course. Because of the incident, Game Warden Welch +of Santa Cruz County lost his position. Welch was a county official, +paid by the county. The Commission complained that he had written a +letter to Polsley commending the Assemblyman for his effort to secure a +report 'from the Commission. Santa Cruz County receives a monthly +stipend from the Commission toward the support of the Brookdale +hatchery. The writer is reliably informed that one of the Commissioners +stated that the Commission would do nothing for Santa Cruz County so +long as "that man Welch" remained in office. Welch was removed by the +Supervisors. Welch has a national-wide reputation as a game warden, and +such papers as the "Forest and Stream," New York, and "Sports Afield," +Chicago, have joined the California press in denunciation of his +dismissal. + +As these pages are going through the press, word comes from Santa Cruz +that Welch has been reinstated by Judge Lucas F. Smith of the Superior +Court of Santa Cruz County. + +In summarizing his findings, Judge Smith holds that the local Board of +Supervisors exceeded its legal power in declaring vacant the office of +voluntary warden, which Welch held; exceeded its legal authority in +removing Welch without specific charges being prepared, notice served on +him and an opportunity given for a hearing. + +[101] All sorts of estimates have been made of the income that would +have been enjoyed by the Fish and Game Commission, had this bill become +a law. The lowest that the writer knows of, made by a disinterested +person, places the increase at $50,000 a year. + +[102] Some of the commission's expense accounts on file with the State +Controller are curiosities. For example, General Stone when he is on +commission business taxes the fund $1 for breakfast, $1 for lunch, $1 +for dinner. It thus costs the Commission three annual hunter's licenses +to feed General Stone for a day. + + + +Chapter XXV. + +The Rewarding of the Faithful. + +Senators and Assemblymen Whose Votes Were Cast Against Reform Measures +Given State and Federal Positions in Some Instances, in Others Appointed +to Holdover Committees or Sent on Trips at the Expense of the State. + + + +The machine has many ways of rewarding the faithful who persist until +the end. The faithful member of Senate or Assembly may be rewarded by a +Federal appointment (Senator Bates has just been graciously recognized +in this way[102a]) or he may be given a State job (witness Senator Price +or Assemblyman Beardslee) ; or he may be put on a legislative hold-over +committee to investigate something, or to represent the State at +something, or to prepare some kind of a bill to be introduced at the +next session of the Legislature. + +This last is perhaps the most genteel method of reward. It entails +little work, gives the beneficiary a certain distinction and pays very +well. + +Nine Senators were rewarded in this way in the closing hours of the +session of 1909. There might have been ten, but that prince of +"bandwagon" Senators, Welch, had to be rewarded twice, so but nine got +holdover committeeships. They are Wolfe, Welch, Wright, Willis, Leavitt, +Bills (labeled Republicans), Kennedy, Hare and Curtin (labeled +Democrats). The names of the nine are not unfamiliar. With the exception +of that of Curtin, their votes during the session were consistently cast +on the side of the machine. For them to be rewarded came as a matter of +course. + +The machine will continue to reward such men until the people take the +Legislature out of machine hands. But that is another story. + +The Legislative Holdover Committee is about as useless a thing as can be +imagined. This is very well illustrated by the State's experience with +the so-called Harbors Committee, appointed by the Legislature of 1907 to +inquire into harbor conditions throughout the State. + +The committee consisted of three Senators and three Assemblymen. The +Senators managed to incur expenses of $2,524.20. Assemblymen were more +modest. Their expenses were only $1,851.80, making a total expense +charge for the committee of $4,376. + +But the $4,376 covers the committee's expenses only, does not provide +compensation for the committeemen. A bill appropriating $6,000 for that +purpose was introduced at the session of 1909. This gave the +committeemen $1,000 each for their services. It made the investigation +cost the State $10,376[102b]. + +The Harbors Committee - or somebody or something else, the writer is not +sure which - prepared an elaborate report of the committee's findings. +But owing to a surprising blunder that involved Senator Wolfe most +curiously, the report was not filed until March 23, the day before the +Legislature adjourned. The report was ordered printed in the journal, +but it did not appear in the journal of the 23rd, which was circulated +on the morning of the 24th. Instead, was a note to the effect that it +would appear in the corrected journal. So, few knew that it had been +filed at all, and it went unnoticed by the daily press. + +But the details of the report[102c] were known to the general public +long before it was filed with the Senate, and its provisions made +Senator Wolfe appear to exceptional disadvantage. Wolfe was a member of +the Harbors Committee, as was Senator Wright. Among the recommendations +set forth in the report as originally prepared, was one that forty-four +blocks only of land be purchased by the State for the improvement of the +San Francisco Harbor at Islais Creek, instead of the sixty-three blocks +necessary for practical harbor development. + +Senator Wolfe was a warm advocate of the sixty-three block plan which is +the only practical plan, by the way, and shows that Senator Wolfe can +land on the right side of things occasionally. But it was very +discouraging for Senator Wolfe to be confronted with the unfiled report +of his own Harbors Committee, endorsed by his own signature as +committeeman, in which the purchase of only forty-four blocks was urged. + +Senator Wolfe's defense was ingenious. He stated that he had signed the +report as a matter of courtesy, not really knowing what it contained. +The incident illustrates the value to the State of such legislative +investigations. + +But in spite of the curious history of Wolfe's Harbors Committee, he was +given another holdover committee in 1909. The Senate - on Wolfe's motion +- adopted a resolution setting aside $5,000 to meet the expenses of a +holdover committee to consist of three members to investigate the cause +of recent advances in the cost of foodstuffs. Senators Wolfe, Welch and +Hare are honored with the appointments. Lieutenant-Governor Porter +appointed. + +Senator Wolfe, from the machine standpoint, certainly earned the +distinction thus thrust upon him, and his share of the money. Senator +Wolfe was not in good health during the session, but in spite of his +indisposition he managed to be present in the Senate Chamber, where +often, pale, haggard and plainly on the verge of breakdown, he fought +valiantly against the reform measures which were aimed at the prestige +of the State machine, and the domination of the tenderloin, the Southern +Pacific Railroad, the racetrack gamblers and allied interests in State +politics. + +Wolfe led the fight against the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill, against +the Local Option bill, against the effective Stetson Railroad Regulation +bill, against the Direct Primary bill, against admitting Senator Bell of +Pasadena to the Republican caucus, against the bill to prohibit the sale +of intoxicants within a mile and a half of Stanford University, against +the initiative amendment to the Constitution, against the amendment to +the Constitution to correct ambiguities as to the powers and duties of +the State Railroad Commission, and against Burnett's resolution for the +investigation of the cause of the increase in freight rates and express +charges. Senator Wolfe also led the fight for the passage of the Change +of Venue bill. + +Curiously enough, Senator Wolfe's stock argument, used in most of the +opposition to reform measures, was to the effect that if such measures +became laws, the Republican party in California would be undermined. +Senator Wolfe's argument had great weight with Republicans like Leavitt +and Weed and Democrats like Hare and Kennedy. For the "good of the +Republican party," these gentlemen generally voted as Senator Wolfe +dictated. + +Senator Welch, the second member of the Pure Food Committee, is at least +entitled to gracious consideration at the hands of the Wolfe-Leavitt +element. Senator Welch was one of the twenty-seven Call-heralded heroes +who defeated the Wolfe-Leavitt element in the first fight on the Direct +Primary bill in the Senate. And Senator Welch was one of the seven +heroes who "flopped" to the Wolfe-Leavitt side when the psychological +moment came. Welch's one vote in the final struggle would have decided +the Direct Primary fight for the side of the reform element. But when +the reform element needed Welch he was found snugly quartered with Wolfe +and Leavitt. + +Welch voted for the Walker-Otis bill, but he was one of the last members +of the Senate to be counted for that measure. Indeed, Welch caught the +rear of the bandwagon on that issue just in time. + +On railroad issues Welch's record is as good as the Southern Pacific +Railroad could wish. He voted against the adoption of the practical +absolute rate, and for the impracticable maximum rate; he voted for the +ineffective Wright bill and against the effective Stetson bill. He voted +against the Constitutional Amendment simplyfying the wording of the +Constitution in those sections which prescribe the powers and duties of +the Railroad Commissioners. + +So Senator Welch had his appointment to the Food Investigation Committee +due him. He was also made member of the Legislative Committee to +represent the State at the Alaska-Yukon Exposition, of which more later. +Thus Senator Welch rounded out the session very satisfactorily to +Senator Welch and to the machine, if not to the State of California. + +Senator Hare is down in the legislative records as a Democrat. He voted +on most measures consistently under the lead of Wolfe and Leavitt. His +appointment need not, therefore, cause surprise. + +When the Direct Primary bill was before the Senate Committee on Election +Laws, Hare's vote was with those of Wolfe and Leavitt to make the +measure as ineffective as possible. Hare was among the thirteen +unworthies who voted against the measure when the first fight was made +for it on the floor of the Senate; he was among the twenty who finally, +under Wolfe's leadership, held the measure up in the Senate until by +trick it could be amended to the machine's liking. Hare was one of the +seven Senators who voted against the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill. He +was one of those who voted for the passage of the Change of Venue bill. + +On railroad measures Hare voted against the Stetson bill and for the +Wright bill, against the absolute rate and for the maximum rate. He +voted against the amendment to the Constitution to clear up the alleged +ambiguity regarding the powers and duties of the Railroad Commissioners. + +Lack of space prevents continuance of the review of Hare's votes. But +enough has been said to show that this "Democrat" was entitled to the +honor at the hands of the Performer, Republican Lieutenant Governor +Warren Porter, of appointment to the Holdover Committee which, under the +leadership of Senator Eddie Wolfe, will investigate the cause of the +increase in the price of foodstuffs. + +But a far more desirable appointment was to the committee which is to +represent the State at the Alaska-Yukon Pacific Exposition. By +concurrent resolution the Senate and Assembly decided that seven +Senators, seven Assemblymen, one Lieutenant Governor (Warren Porter) and +one Governor (Gillett) should attend the exposition at the State's +expense. For this purpose $7,000 of the State's money has been provided. + +The seven Senators appointed by Performer Porter are Wright, Willis, +Welch, Leavitt, Bills, Kennedy, Curtin. + +The seven Assemblymen appointed by Speaker Stanton are Transue, +Beardslee, Leeds, Hewitt, McManus, McClellan and Schimtt. + +The records of the Senators thus honored show them worthy the machine's +consideration. Their votes on the banner measures before the Legislature +last winter were as follows: + +Against the Walker-Otis bill, to prohibit poolselling and bookmaking +(Anti-Gambling bill) - Leavitt - 1. + +For the Walker-Otis bill-Bills, Curtin, Kennedy, Willis, Welch, Wright - +6. + +Only seven Senators voted against the Walker-Otis bill. Of the seven +Leavitt is given the Alaska trip; Wolfe and Hare are put on the Food +Investigation Committee. Thus of nine Senators who got on holdover +committees three were among the seven who voted in the interest of the +gambling element. + +The records made by the State Senators who will attend the exposition at +the State's expense in the Direct Primary fight are quite as suggestive. +When the first attempt was made in the Senate to force the machine +amendments into the bill, February 18, the seven Senators voted as +follows: + +For the machine's amendments - Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt, Willis. + +Against the machine's amendments - Curtin, Welch, Wright. + +Thirteen Senators on February 18 voted for the machine's amendments. Of +their number Hare and Wolfe are on the Food Investigation Committee; +Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt and Willis are to attend the exposition at the +State's expense. Thus six of the thirteen have been rewarded. + +The machine, having failed to amend the Direct Primary bill in the +Senate, amended it in the Assembly. When the measure was returned to the +Senate, six of the seven Senators who will attend the exposition voted +to concur in the Assembly amendments. They were, Bills, Kennedy, +Leavitt, Welch, Willis and Wright. Only one of the seven voted against +the machine amendments, Curtin. + +The records of the seven favored, trip-taking Senators on railroad +regulation measures are as follows: + +For the Wright bill, against the Stetson bill; for the maximum rate, +against the absolute rate - Leavitt, Welch, Willis, Wright, Bills, +Kennedy - 6. + +Against the Wright bill, for the Stetson bill, against the maximum rate, +for the absolute rate - Curtin - 1. + +Against the constitutional amendment to make clear the powers and duties +of Railroad Commissioners - Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt, Welch, Willis - 5. + +For the amendment - Curtin, Wright - 2. + +Against the Burnett resolution calling for an investigation of the cause +for an increase in freight rates - Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt, Willis, +Wright - 5. + +For the resolution - 0. + +Absent or not voting - Curtin, Welch - 2. + +The records of the seven on the Local Option bill and the Change of +Venue bill are: + +Against Local Option - Leavitt, Welch, Willis, Bills, Curtin, Kennedy - +6. + +For Local Option - Wright - 1. + +For the Change of Venue bill - Bills, Leavitt, Welch, Willis, Wright - +5. + +Against the Change of Venue bill - Curtin, Kennedy - 2. + +Kennedy, to be sure, voted against the Change of Venue bill when that +measure passed the Senate. But Senator Kennedy was unaccountably absent +the next morning when the Change of Venue bill was taken up on a motion +for reconsideration. Because of Kennedy's absence, the motion to +reconsider the measure was lost, and its defeat prevented. Senator +Kennedy is scarcely entitled to credit for being recorded on the right +side of this measure. + +Nine Senators are included in the two hold-over committees which are +under consideration. As Wolfe and Hare invariably voted with Leavitt, it +will be seen that eight of the nine voted against the Stetson bill and +for the Wright bill; seven of the nine voted against the Constitutional +amendment to make plain the constitutional powers and duties of the +Railroad Commissioners; seven of the nine voted against investigating +the cause of increase in freight and express rates to the Pacific Coast; +eight of the nine voted against local option; seven voted for the Change +of Venue bill, and one of the two others as good as voted for it, +although on record against the measure. + +As Republican Senators Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Cutten, +Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Strobridge and Thompson, who were invariably +on the right side of things, look upon the records of the "Democrats" +and "Republicans" included among the nine favored receivers of plums, +they can scarcely be blamed for demanding with the discouraged little +boy - What's the use of being good, anyhow? + +And as the Democratic Senators, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, +Holohan, Miller and Sanford, who worked with the anti-machine +Republicans for the passage of good laws and the defeat of bad ones look +upon the favored Hare and Kennedy they cannot be blamed if the same +question occurs to them also. + +The indications are that the Senators who were thus overlooked will have +"to wait for theirs," until The People of California, and not the +machine, award the prizes for faithful public service. + +Of the seven Assemblymen who will attend the Alaska-Yukon Exposition, +one, Hewitt, voted against the machine on every important issue that +came up. The other six are a spotted lot. + +The six - Beardslee, Leeds, McManus, McClellan, Schmitt and Transue - +voted for the famous "gag rules" which the Assembly rejected by a vote +of 41 to 32. Indeed, Beardslee and Transue were on the Committee on +Rules which the Assembly, when it rejected the Committee's rules, +repudiated. + +In the fight for the passage of the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill, two +of the six, Leeds and Transue, managed to keep their records straight. +On the six roll-calls taken on the measure before it passed the +Assembly, Beardslee voted five times against the bill and once for it; +McManus voted six times against it; Schmitt voted five times against it, +on one roll-call he did not vote; while McClellan voted four times for +it and twice against. + +Five of the six, Beardslee, Leeds, McManus, McClellan and Schmitt voted +against forcing out of the Committee on Federal Relations the Sanford +resolution, which called for a government line of steamers from Panama +to San Francisco. The five voted for the Johnson amendments to the +resolutions, which cut out all criticizing reference to the +rate-boosting combinations between the great transportation companies. +Transue was absent when the vote to force the resolution out of +committee was taken. But he was present to vote for the Johnson +amendments. + +Five of the six, Leeds, McManus, McClellan, Schmitt and Transue, voted +for the machine amendments to the Direct Primary bill, which were read +into that measure in the Assembly, and which resulted in the Senate +deadlock over the measure. Beardslee voted against the amendments. + +Five of the six - Beardslee, Leeds, McManus, McClellan and Transue - +voted against the Holohan bill to remove the party circle from the +election ballot. Schmitt did not vote on this measure. + +Assemblyman Hewitt will, at the Alaska-Yukon, find himself in +distinguished company. From the Wolfe-Leavitt-Johnson standpoint, he is +the only one of his associates who cannot be said to have earned the +preferment thrust upon him. + + + +[102a] As these forms are going through the press, word comes that +Senator Willis has been made Assistant United States District Attorney +at Los Angeles. See Willis' record, Table "A" of the appendix. + +[102b] The State Constitution provides no method of compensation for +such services. The providing of this compensation, therefore, becomes a +matter of great delicacy. It is done, under a decision of the Supreme +Court that that tribunal cannot go back of a legislative Act, but must +abide by the wording of the Act. The appropriation bills to compensate +the members for their services on hold-over Committees are worded to +meet the opinion of the courts. The money is invariably appropriated "to +pay the claim of," etc. The Legislature is, according to the courts, the +sole Judge of whether the alleged claim is a claim and not a petition +for a gift. The "to -pay- the-claim-of" bills never fail to pull down +the money. + +[102c] The report as originally drawn, and as it was signed by Senator +Wolfe and his associates. + + + +Chapter XXVI. + +The Holdover Senators. + +Eleven of Them May Be Counted Upon to Vote Against the Machine at the +Session of 1911, Two Are Doubtful, One Will Probably Vote with the +Majority, While Six May Be Counted Upon to Support Machine Policies. + + + +Twenty of the 120 members who sat in the Legislature of 1909 - half of +the forty Senators - hold over and will serve in the Legislature of +1911. The twenty constitute the strength with which the machine and the +anti-machine forces will enter the field in the struggle for control of +the Legislature two years hence. + +The machine has, long before this, taken stock of those twenty holdover +Senators. Machine agents unquestionably know what the holdover members +owe and to whom indebted; know their family history; know the church to +which they belong, their lodges, their likes, their dislikes and their +prejudices; know how they can be "reached" if vulnerable; know how they +can be "kept in line" if already tarred with the machine brush. + +But the plain citizen, not within the charmed circle of machine +protection, is not concerning himself much about these holdovers. He +scarcely knows their names. It is safe to say that not 2 per cent of the +voters of California could off-hand name the twenty holdover members of +the Upper House of the Legislature. + +In other words, the machine is posted, and the citizen is not. And here +is the secret of much of the machine's success. In its campaign for +control of affairs, the machine knows to a nicety just what to expect +from men in public life; the plain citizen is without such information. + +In the Appendix will be found a table, "Table H," showing the votes of +the twenty holdover Senators on sixteen roll calls. Representative +citizens, all standing for good government, may differ as to the +desirability or undesirability of several of the measures included in +the list. But by and large the average normal citizen will hold that +certain of the sixteen measures are desirable and others undesirable. +Thus all would probably agree that the Change of Venue bill is +undesirable legislation, and declare the Walker-Otis Anti-Racetrack +Gambling measure to be desirable, although they might honestly differ on +the Local Option bill. + +On the sixteen roll calls the twenty holdover Senators cast 283 votes. +Of the 283, 164 are recorded against what the normal citizen would +regard as bad measures, or for what the normal citizen would regard as +good measures. In other words, speaking broadly, 164 of the 283 votes +were cast against machine policies. Only 119 were cast with the machine. +In other words, over the whole session, on what may be fairly considered +the most important roll calls taken in the Senate, the holdover Senators +cast 164 votes against the machine and only 119 votes for the machine. +This isn't a bad showing to start with. + +The showing is strengthened by the fact that ninety-two of the 119 +machine votes were cast by eight Senators, Finn, Wolfe, Bills, +Martinelli, Hurd, Hare, Lewis and Welch. Senator Finn of San Francisco +heads the list with fifteen of these negative votes. On one occasion +Senator Finn didn't vote. After Finn comes Wolfe, also from San +Francisco, with thirteen of the ninety-two negative or machine votes to +his credit or his discredit; Bills of Sacramento and Martinelli of Marin +follow with twelve each; Hurd of Los Angeles with eleven; Hare of San +Francisco and Lewis of San Joaquin with ten each, and Welch of San +Francisco with nine. + +This leaves twenty-seven machine votes to be divided among twelve of the +holdover Senators, about two votes on an average each. + +Burnett is credited with seven of the twenty-seven, which reduces the +number to twenty for eleven Senators. Of the twenty votes, seven were +cast in the two ballots taken on the Local Option issue, again the bill; +and eight were cast in two ballots against the Holohan bill to remove +the party circle from the election ballot. + +Thus, excluding the votes on local option, and on the Party Circle bill, +on twelve important ballots, eleven of the holdover Senators cast only +five votes for machine policies. + +The eleven are Birdsall, Campbell, Cutten, Estudillo, Holohan, +Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson and Walker. + +These eleven Senators, as judged by their performances at the session +just closed, may be depended upon to vote for good bills and against bad +ones at the session of 1911. + +To this list should be added the name of Burnett. Burnett got off wrong +on the Stetson Railroad Regulation bill, and managed to land with the +Wolfe element in the direct primary fight. But there is good reason to +believe that Burnett was very sick of his company before the session +closed. The probabilities are that Senator Burnett feels more at home +with Senators Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson and Cutten than with Hare, +Finn and Wolfe. + +Senator Hurd is another holdover who started out very well, but went +badly astray after the vote on the Railroad Regulation bills. Like +Burnett, Hurd showed signs toward the end of the session of feeling +himself in uncongenial company. There is reason to believe that Hurd at +the next session will be found voting with the +Thompson-Stetson-Strobridge element. + +Senator Welch will be found voting with the majority. This reduces the +number of holdover Senators who can be counted upon to accept Wolfe's +leadership, machine Senators, if you like, to six. The line-up of the +twenty holdovers, then, would on this basis be as follows: + +Anti-machine - Birdsall, Cutten, Estudillo, Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, +Strobridge, Thompson, Walker (Republicans), Campbell, Holohan +(Democrats) - 11. + +Doubtful - Burnett, Hurd (Republicans) - 2. + +With the majority - Welch (Republican) - 1. + +Machine - Bills, Finn, Lewis[103], Martinelli, Wolfe (Republicans), Hare +(Democrat) - 6. + +On this basis the anti-machine element will start with all the advantage +in the struggle for control of the Senate in 1911. If Burnett and Hurd +vote with the eleven anti-machine Senators, it will be necessary to +elect only eight anti-machine Senators that the reform element may +control the Senate. This will mean twenty-two votes for the reform +element, for Welch, if he is to be judged by past performances, will be +found with the majority. + + From present indications, four important fights will be made at the +Legislative session of 1911. + +(1) To pass an effective railroad regulation measure and to amend those +sections of the State Constitution which prescribe the duties and powers +of the Railroad Commissioners. + +(2) To amend the Direct Primary law passed at the session just closed to +meet with the popular demand for an effective measure. + +(3) To grant local option to the counties. + +(4) To adopt an amendment to the State Constitution granting the +initiative to the electors of the State. + +Significantly enough, the line-up of the holdover Senators in the Direct +Primary deadlock of the last session was nine to eleven, the eleven +Senators who divide but five machine votes between them standing out +against Wolfe and Leavitt for an effective provision for the selection +of United States Senators by State-wide vote, while the six machine +Senators, the "bandwagon" Senator and the two doubtfuls, voted with +Wolfe and Leavitt. + +But the probabilities are that in the event of the anti-machine element +controlling the Senate of 1911, Burnett, Hurd, Lewis, Martinelli and +Welch would join with the reform forces to make necessary amendments to +the measure. When the Direct Primary bill was first before the Senate, +these five Senators united with the Good Government forces and assisted +in defeating the machine's amendment. When the bill was amended in the +Assembly, however, the five flopped to the machine side. Indeed, only +four of the twenty holdover Senators voted for the machine's amendments +to the Direct Primary bill when the measure was first passed upon by the +Senate. They were Bills, Finn, Hare and Wolfe. + +The holdover Senators made their poorest showing on the railroad +measures. When the test came on the Stetson bill the twenty holdovers +split even, ten being for the effective Stetson bill, ten for the +ineffective Wright bill. The line-up was as follows: + +For the Stetson bill - Birdsall, Campbell, Cutten, Holohan, Lewis, +Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson - 10. + +For the Wright bill - Bills, Burnett, Estudillo, Finn, Hare, Hurd, +Martinelli, Walker, Welch, Wolfe - 10. + +Lewis, who usually voted with the performers, voted for the Stetson +bill. But the reform forces lost two votes, those of Walker and +Estudillo. On another vote on the same issue, however, Burnett, +Estudillo and Walker would probably be found with the anti-machine +forces supporting an effective measure. This would make the vote of the +holdover Senators, thirteen for effective railroad regulation, and seven +for a measure of the Wright law variety. + +The holdovers made a good showing on the Initiative amendment, eleven +voting for it and five against it, four not voting at all. The vote was +as follows: + +For the Initiative - Birdsall, Campbell, Cutten, Estudillo, Hare, +Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Thompson, Walker, Welch - 11. + +Against the Initiative - Bills, Hurd, Lewis, Martinelli, Wolfe - 5. + +Not voting - Burnett, Finn, Holohan, Strobridge - 4. + +Of the four who did not vote, three, Burnett, Holohan and Strobridge, +would have voted for the amendment. Finn would probably have voted +against it. This would have made the vote fourteen to six in the +amendment's favor. It will be seen that those who would have the +initiative granted the people, have a good start for the next session. + +The outlook for local option is not so reassuring. Of the holdover +Senators who ordinarily were for measures which give the people a voice +in the management of public affairs, Birdsall, Holohan, Rush and +Strobridge were unalterably opposed to the local option idea. The six +machine Senators, of course, opposed it, which with the votes of +Burnett, Welch and Hurd placed thirteen of the twenty holdover Senators +against the measure. + +Six of the holdovers voted for the Local Option bill - Campbell, Cutten, +Estudillo, Roseberry, Thompson and Walker. + +Stetson was absent and did not vote. He, however, favored the bill. His +vote would have made it 13 to 7. Thus on the vote on their bill at the +last session, the local option forces have seven of the holdover +Senators with them, and thirteen against. + +On the other hand, seventeen of the holdover Senators voted for the +Walker-Otis Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill, while only three, Finn, Hare +and Wolfe, voted against it. Thus on the moral issue, as well as the +political and the industrial, the anti-machine element is stronger in +the holdover delegation in the Senate than is the machine. It rests with +the good citizenship of California to maintain its advantage by electing +to the Senate in 1910, men who will stand with the majority of the +holdover members for the passage of good and the defeat of vicious +measures. + + + +[103] Lewis voted with the anti-machine element in the Railroad +Regulation fight, one of the most severe tests of the session. Persons +who know Lewis well stated that he will, if the anti-machine forces be +effectively organized at the session of 1911, be found against the +machine. It is "up to Senator Lewis." + + + +Chapter XXVII. + +The Retiring Senators. + +Of the Twenty Whose Terms of Office Will Have Expired, the Machine Loses +Eleven, the Anti-Machine Element Seven - Two Who Voted With the Machine +on Occasion Were Usually on the Side of Good Government. + + + +Twenty of the forty Senators who sat in the Legislature of 1909, must, +if they sit in the Legislature of 1911, be re-elected at the general +elections in November 1910. They are: Senators Anthony of San Francisco, +Bates of Alameda, Bell of Pasadena, Black of Santa Clara, Boynton of +Yuba, Caminetti of Amador, Cartwright of Fresno, Curtin of Tuolumne, +Hartman of San Francisco, Kennedy of San Francisco, Leavitt of Alameda, +McCartney of Los Angeles, Miller of Kern, Price of Sonoma, Reily of San +Francisco, Sanford of Mendocino, Savage of Los Angeles, Weed of +Siskiyou, Willis of San Bernardino and Wright of San Diego. + +By consulting Table A of the Appendix, it will be seen that on sixteen +roll calls the forty members of the Senate of 1909 voted 570 times. Of +the 570 votes 311 were cast against what are regarded as machine +policies; 259 for such policies. Of the 311 anti-machine votes, 164 were +cast by holdover Senators, and were considered in the last chapter, +while 147 were cast by Senators whose successors will be elected in +1910. Thus it will be seen, that on this basis, more desirable Senators +will hold over than those whose terms of office will have expired before +the next Legislature convenes. + +On the basis of the machine votes the result is as satisfactory. On the +sixteen roll calls, 259 machine votes were cast. Of these 140 were cast +by the retiring Senators, and only 119 by those who will hold over, and +who will sit in the Legislature of 1911. So, on the whole, the machine +loses and the people gain in the retirement of the twenty Senators. + +In point of numbers the result is as satisfactory. The machine will lose +eleven Senators: Bates, Hartman, Kennedy, Leavitt, McCartney, Price, +Reily, Savage, Weed, Willis and Wright; while the anti-machine forces +will lose only seven who can be counted constantly for reform policies: +Bell, Black, Boynton, Caminetti, Cartwright, Miller and Sanford. + +This leaves only Anthony and Curtin to be accounted for. Both these men +stood out against the machine's amendments to the Direct Primary bill, +Anthony in particular standing against the severest pressure that could +be brought to compel him to vote against the interests of his +constituents and of the State. But Anthony could not be moved. On the +railroad measures, however, Anthony voted with the machine. But he voted +for the Walker-Otis bill, and, generally speaking, for all measures +which made for political reforms. With any sort of organization of the +reform forces, Anthony could be counted upon as safe for reform. His +record on the Direct Primary bill certainly entitles him to the highest +consideration. + +Curtin also was as a general thing with the reform element. He voted, +however, against the bill to do away with the party circle and he voted +against the Local Option bill, but in so doing he merely followed the +lead of such men as Birdsall, who, while out and out against the +machine, were at the same time against local option and lukewarm on +ballot reform. Birdsall, however, finally voted for the bill to remove +the party circle from the election ballot, although he had on the first +ballot voted against the bill. Curtin did not, however, change his vote. +But Curtin did vote against the Initiative Amendment. On the other hand, +Curtin's record on the Direct Primary bill, on the Railroad Regulation +bills, and on the Anti-Gambling bill is all that could be desired. + +While the retirement of all the Senators who do not hold over would +strengthen the reform element in the Senate, nevertheless the State can +ill afford to lose the services of the seven who stood out so valiantly +against machine policies. Senator Bell heads the list, with Caminetti, +Black, Boynton and Sanford close seconds. + +Senator Bell not only made the best record made in the Senate of 1909, +but he made the best record of the Senate of 1907. Conscientious, fully +awake to the responsibilities of his position, alive to the tricks of +the machine leaders, in constant attendance, Senator Bell proved himself +during the two sessions that he has served in the Senate, a power for +good government. His absence from the session of 1911 would be a loss to +the State. + +Senators Black and Boynton at the session of 1909 made records quite as +good as that made by Senator Bell. On the sixteen roll calls taken as +tests of the standing of the several Senators, Black voted but once +against reform policies. On the first ballot on the Party Circle bill he +voted against the measure, but the day following, corrected his mistake +by voting for the measure. Boynton voted to return the Local Option bill +to the Judiciary Committee, but at the final test his vote was recorded +for the bill[103a]. Thus neither of the two Senators can be said to have +voted with the machine even on comparatively unimportant issues. + +Senator Caminetti probably gave the machine more worry during the +session than any other one Senator. Caminetti has, a way of saying out +loud what his anti-machine associates are thinking, which is not at all +popular with the machine. True to principle, he, a Democrat, voted for +United States Senator Perkins because, from Caminetti's view-point, no +other candidate came so near to being the popular choice of the people +as Perkins, and Caminetti holds that the people and not the Legislature +should select the United States Senator. The machine was glad of +Caminetti's vote for Perkins, but was not at all pleased with the +departure of a Democrat voting for a Republican. Caminetti's course +continued in by all the members of the Legislature, and the machine +would lose its monopoly of Federal Senator-making. + +Caminetti's record is admirable. To be sure, he opposed Local Option, +but he fought as few others fought for an effective Direct Primary law, +for effective railroad regulation, in fact for practically all the +reform policies which the anti-machine forces advocated and the machine +opposed. Senator Sanford also voted for and worked for reform policies. +Like Caminetti, however, he opposed the Local Option bill and voted +against it. Senator Miller, on the other hand, supported the Local +Option bill, but slipped more seriously than did either Caminetti or +Sanford, by voting with the machine Senators against the Initiative +amendment. Miller's work for effective railroad regulation and for an +effective Direct Primary law, won him the deserved admiration and +confidence of the better element of the Legislature. Senator Cartwright +voted but twelve times on the sixteen roll calls, but the twelve +included the votes on the Direct Primary issues, on railroad regulation, +and on all the moral issues considered. And each time, Senator +Cartwright's vote was cast on the side of good government. + +On the other side, the machine side, Senator Bates distinguished himself +but once during the session. It was Senator Bates who, to oblige a +friend, had the notorious Change of Venue bill placed on the Special +Urgency File, thus making the passage of the bill possible. Senator +Bates' vote and influence - such as it was - were thrown in the balance +against giving the people of California a State-wide vote - the only +practical vote - for United States Senators. He voted against the +effective Stetson bill; he voted for the ineffective Railroad Regulation +bill. In fact, aside from the Walker-Otis bill, Bates was on the machine +side of practically every issue[104]. + +Senator Hartman was during the session a mere machine vote. He was +always on hand, always voted, and voted with the machine. It was Senator +Hartman who named an employee of the notorious Sausalito gambling rooms +for an important committee clerkship. So far as the writer can recall, +Hartman made but two speeches during the session; one against the +Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill, one against the Islais Creek Harbor +bill, the passage of which meant so much for San Francisco, the city, by +the way, responsible for Hartman's presence at Sacramento. + +On the sixteen roll calls under consideration, Hartman voted sixteen +times for machine policies. As a vote, Hartman is a valuable machine +asset; otherwise a nonentity. + +Those who have read the previous chapters have already formed their +opinion of the advisability of returning to the Senate, Kennedy, the +hero of the passage of the Change of Venue bill; McCartney, the author +of the famous amendment to the Direct Primary bill; Weed, who introduced +the resolution to drag Senator Black from his sick bed at Palo Alto; +Reily, who with Senator Hartman, alone of all the Senate stood out +against the passage of the Islais Creek Harbor bills; Willis, who as +Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, backed such measures as the Change +of Venue bill, and opposed such measures as the Commonwealth Club bills; +Savage, who in committee and out of it, opposed the State-wide vote plan +for nominating United States Senators, and Senator Price. + +Price did not distinguish himself particularly. On the sixteen roll +calls included in Table A, his vote was recorded against the machine as +many as four times. But there were ten Senators who did even worse. +However, a story of the closing days of the session is quite +characteristic of Senator Price. + +An important roll call was on - if the writer remembers correctly, it +was on Burnett's motion to continue the investigation into the causes of +the increase of freight and express rates. Price was present, but did +not answer to the call of his name. The advocates of the resolution +insisted that all vote, and demanded a call of the Senate. The doors +were ordered closed, at which order Price made a run for the door. +Caminetti saw the move, understood it and started to intercept the +fleeing Senator. But if Caminetti were quick, Price was quicker. +Caminetti missed his grab at Price, and so chased that gentleman to the +door of the Senate chamber. The assistant Sergeant-at-Arms at the door +was just swinging it closed as Price shot through. The determined +Caminetti made a last grab at Price's coattails, but too late. The +massive doors banged closed, with Price, coattails and all, on the +outside, and the balked Caminetti on the inside. Price didn't vote on +that roll call. + +The failure to return Leavitt to the Senate will be a decided loss for +the machine, one hard to offset. Next to Wolfe, Leavitt was by far the +ablest floor leader in the Senate. The brute force of the man, his +grossness, his indifference to public opinion, made him an ideal +machine leader. Leavitt's return from Alameda seems extremely doubtful. +His district takes in the notorious gambling community, Emeryville, +which will be purged of the thug element that has dominated it, by the +enforcement of the Walker-Otis law. With the loss of this portion of +his constituency, Senator Leavitt's chance of re-election from +Emeryville appears slim indeed. + +But, according to rather persistent rumor, Senator Leavitt may be +returned to the Senate, not from Alameda, but from the Siskiyou-Shasta +District, the district represented by Weed. Leavitt has property up +there, and the story runs that he will be a candidate from that part of +the State. The voters of Shasta and Siskiyou, however, may conclude that +they have something to say about it. + +Senator Wright, the last of the Senators whose terms will have expired +before the next session of the Legislature convenes, is being mentioned +as a "reform candidate" for Governor. The idea seems to be that he will +run on his record made at the session of 1909. If this be true, he may +not be a candidate for re-election to the Senate. Senator Wright's +record as a State Senator has already been treated at length. + + + +[103a] Senator Boynton was a consistent supporter of the Local Option +bill from the beginning to the end of the session. He held, however, +that the bill as originally drawn was not in proper form, and explained +that he voted to have the bill returned to the committee that +amendments, which he deemed necessary, could be made. + +[104] Since the Legislature adjourned Senator Bates has been given a +lucrative position in the United States Mint. + + + +Chapter XXVIII. + +Conclusion. + +Events of the Session of 1909 Show That Before Any Effective Reform Can +Be Brought About in California, Good Government Republicans and +Democrats Must Unite to Organize Senate and Assembly - Appointment of +Senate Committees May Be Taken Out of the Hands of the +Lieutenant-Governor. + + + +In the opening chapter it was stated that the machine element in the +Legislature of 1909, although in the minority, defeated the purposes of +the reform majority, because of three principal reasons: + +(1) The reform element was without organization. + +(2) The reform members had, except in the anti-racetrack gambling fight, +no definite plan of action. + +(3) The reform members of both Houses permitted the machine to name +presiding officers and appoint committees. + +This third reason must appeal to those who have read the foregoing pages +as the most important of all. The story of every machine success, in +face of opposition, is that of advantage gained through the moral +support given by the presiding officers[105], or of co-operation of +committees, or of both. But, unfortunately, a stupid partisanship - a +partisanship which the machine finds far more potent than bribe money - +makes this cause of machine success more difficult to overcome than +either of the others. Already a movement is on foot, the details of +which the writer is not at liberty to make public, that will unite the +reform element of the next Legislature into a working body, from the day +nominations are made. Steps to this end were taken before the last +Legislature adjourned. In the same way, the work of bringing reform +issues before the public - reform of the ballot laws, amendment of the +Direct Primary law, the simplification of the mode of criminal procedure +- is being taken up in the same effective, commonsense way as was the +Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. But here the progress of the commonsense +element of machine opposition seems to halt. In spite of their +experience of the last session, Democrats and Republicans who stand for +good government hesitate at the suggestion of non-partisan organization +of Senate and Assembly. The writer has shown in the foregoing chapters +that the machine Republicans and the machine Democrats were for +practical purposes a unit in the organization of the Legislature of +1909. Why, then, should not the anti-machine Republicans and the +anti-machine Democrats unite for purposes of organization, just as they +united, at the session of 1909, to oppose vicious measures and to work +for the passage of good bills? That is a question which has never been +satisfactorily answered. It leads us, however, to the question of the +real line of division in Senate and Assembly, and, for that matter, in +State politics[106]. + +That the real division is no longer between political parties, or even +between party factions, is apparent to the observer who has given the +question any attention at all. + +Not once, for example, did the California Legislature of 1909 divide on +a party question; nor did it have to deal with any problem that had not +at one time or another been endorsed by both parties. Both Democrats and +Republicans in either State or county platforms had declared for the +passage of an Anti-Racetrack Gambling law, for an effective Direct +Primary law, for an effective Railroad Regulation law, for the +submission to the people of a Constitutional Amendment granting the +people the privilege of initiating laws. In the same way, county +conventions of both parties - and county conventions are the closest to +the people and most representative of them - had declared for local +option, for the election of United States Senators by direct vote of the +people, for amendments to the codes that should simplify proceedings in +criminal cases, for effective railroad regulation. Estimating the +purposes of the two parties by their county and State platforms, none of +these reforms can be regarded as any more Democratic than Republican, +and these were the issues with which the Legislature of 1909 was called +upon to deal. + +A glance at the tables of votes in the appendix will show that the +Assemblymen and the Senators who voted against the Anti-Racetrack +Gambling bill, generally speaking, voted against the effective Stetson +Railroad Regulation bill and for the ineffective Wright bill, opposed +the provision in the Direct Primary bill giving the people an effective +part in the selection of United States Senators, supported the passage +of the Change of Venue bill, opposed the passage of the Local Option +bill, opposed the submission of the Initiative amendment to the electors +of the State. This negative element, opposed to policies which the +normal citizen regards as making for the State's best interests, has in +these pages been called the machine[107]. + +As has been shown in these pages, the interests of the several +beneficiaries of the system are in effect pooled; one element helps the +other. The managers of the several elements, the political agents, if +you like, of the tenderloin, Southern Pacific, racetrack, and +public-service monopolies generally; in a word, all who seek to evade +the law or to secure undue special privileges or to continue secure in +the possession of such privileges already secured, recognize that they +must hang together or submit to a reckoning with the public, which must +necessarily result in the breaking of the particular monopoly which each +enjoys, be it in transportation, nickel-in-the-slot graft, or traffic in +the bodies of young women. Should the political bureau of the Southern +Pacific Railroad Company, for example, lose the support of the +tenderloin, or of the racetrack gamblers, or of any other powerful group +of its political associates, the corporation could no longer continue +its strangle-hold upon the State. But none of its associates would dare +thus offend. Such is the machine, which, in the name of a protective +tariff, "sound money," Abraham Lincoln, or Theodore Roosevelt, has +organized the Legislature of California for sixteen years. Previous to +1895, there were California Legislatures organized in the name of Thomas +Jefferson. But the machine has not taken the name of Thomas Jefferson in +vain in California for many years[108]. + +Nevertheless, although acting under the name Republican, the machine is +quite as dependent upon "Democrats" as upon "Republicans," and as +dependent upon either as upon the tenderloin, the brewery trust or the +racetrack gambling element. It monopolizes neither party, but it divides +both parties. Or it may be described as a canker that has eaten into +both, diseased both, rendered both unwholesome, until a condition exists +in the dominating parties that requires that the uncorrupted element of +both unite to cut the diseased portion away[109]. + +As the machine divides the parties, so did it divide the Republican and +Democratic delegations in the Senate and the Assembly of the California +Legislature of 1909. Hare and Kennedy, for example, Democratic Senators, +voted constantly with Wolfe and Leavitt, Republican Senators, for +machine policies. Nor was the opposition restricted to party lines. +Black and Boynton and Cutten, Republican Senators, were found voting +constantly with Campbell and Holohan, Democratic Senators, against the +machine. Between Black and Wolfe, Republicans, there was nothing in +common during the entire session; nor was there anything in common +between Campbell and Kennedy, Democrats. On practically every important +issue, however, Kennedy, Democrat, and Wolfe, Republican, made common +cause, while Black, Republican, and Campbell, Democrat, opposed them. + +The same comparisons could be made in the Assembly, where such Democrats +as Wheelan and Baxter were found with Mott and Coghlan, Republicans, +supporting machine policies, while opposed to them were anti-machine +Republicans of the character of Bohnett and Callan, and anti-machine +Democrats like Polsley and Mendenhall. + +Thus, for practical purposes, the Legislature can not be divided on +party lines. The only practical line of division is between the machine +element, and the anti-machine element. Such, at the session of 1909, was +the division on every important issue; such will it be at the +legislative session of 1911. Why should not the same division govern the +organization of Senate and Assembly? + +As a matter of fact, the machine disregards party lines even in +organizing. In making up its committees it considers fealty to machine +interests above party name. For example, Hare and Kennedy were the +Democratic Senators who this year affiliated with the machine. Kennedy +was appointed to practically every important committee, at least to +those before which important fights were to be made. Thus we find him on +the Committee on Commerce and Navigation, Contingent Expenses, Elections +and Election Laws, Prisons and Reformatories, and Public Morals, Hare +was appointed to the Committee on Commerce and Navigation, Elections and +Election Laws, Labor, Capital and Immigration, Municipal Corporations, +Printing, and Public Buildings and Grounds. In committees, as well as on +the floor of the Senate, Hare and Kennedy were found as a general thing +casting their influence and their votes on the side of machine policies. + +Had the anti-machine Democrats and the anti-machine Republicans in +Senate and Assembly, who worked together for the same ends and voted +together on practically every important issue, taken the same course, +and united for the organization of the two Houses, reform measures which +were defeated by narrow margins would have been made laws, and machine +measures which became laws defeated. + +Such being the case, is it not the duty of the anti-machine Republicans +and the anti-machine Democrats who may sit in the Legislature of 1911, +to organize both Senate and Assembly to resist machine purposes and +policies? + +This can be done comparatively easily in the Assembly, where a movement +to elect the Speaker such as was started by Drew of Fresno this year, if +carried out, would take the Assembly out of machine hands. Although the +organization of the Senate looks more difficult, because the Senate has +no voice in the selection of its presiding officer, nevertheless, even +though a Warren Porter occupy the post of Lieutenant-Governor, at the +session of 1911 the reform element can elect its President pro tem., and +appoint the Senate committees. In other words, a majority of the Senate, +may if it see fit, take the appointing of the committees out of the +hands of the Lieutenant-Governor. + +There are two important precedents for this course, one established by a +Democratic Senate; the other by a Republican Senate. + +The Democratic precedent was established in 1887. In that year Robert W. +Waterman, a Republican, was Lieutenant-Governor and presiding officer of +the Senate. The Senate was made up of twenty-six Democrats and fourteen +Republicans. The Democratic majority organized the Senate under the +following rule, which will be found in the Senate journal of that +session: + +"All Committees of the Senate, special and standing, and all joint +Committees on the part thereof, shall be elected by the Senate unless +otherwise ordered." + +The Republican precedent was made in 1897. In that year, William T. +Jeter, a Democrat, was Lieutenant-Governor, while a majority of the +Senators were Republicans. Instead of leaving the appointing of the +committees to the Democratic Lieutenant-Governor, the Republican +Senators adopted a rule that "all standing committees of the Senate +shall be named by the Senate, unless otherwise ordered, and the first +named shall be chairman thereof. All other committees shall be appointed +in such manner as the Senate shall determine." + +In other words, the Republican majority of the Senate named the Senate +committees of the session of 1897, taking their appointment out of the +hands of the Lieutenant-Governor as the Democrats had done ten years +before. There is no good reason why the members of the anti-machine +majority in the Senate should not have taken the same course in 1909, +and named the committees. Had they done so, and named the President pro +tem., they would have organized the Senate in the interest of those +policies in advancing which they were soon in open revolt against +Lieutenant-Governor Porter, the machine Senators and the machine lobby. +Failing to do so, they placed themselves under a handicap which they +were unable to overcome. + +The reform element of the Legislature of 1911 will have in the +experience of the reform element of the session of 1909, an important +lesson. And The People of California, who will elect that Legislature, +have a lesson as important. The successes of the machine at the session +of 1909, where a clear majority of both Houses opposed machine policies, +demonstrated that the well-being of the State requires that the +opponents of the machine in Senate and Assembly, regardless of party +label, organize the Legislature. But back of this is the even more +important requirement that there be elected to the Legislature American +citizens, with the responsibility of their citizenship upon them, rather +than partisans, burdened until their good purposes are made negative, by +the responsibility of their partisanship. + + + +[105] See, for example, Speaker Stanton's ruling on the Direct Primary +bill when the Assembly was considering the question of receding from its +amendments. + +[106] The machine recognizes the real division, if the reform element +does not. The machine, for example, calls itself Republican, and as such +controls the patronage of the San Francisco water front. The +appointments to water front jobs are, of course, partisan, but the +writer is reliably informed that as many "Democrats" as "Republicans" +are employed there. Senators Hare and Kennedy, we have seen, although +Democrats, got appointments to holdover committees. The machine +recognizes but one line in politics, that which divides those who +support machine policies from those who stand for good government and +the square deal. When those who stand for good government and the square +deal become as clear sighted, the fight against the machine will not be +quite so unequal. + +[107] The term "machine" is, as a general thing, rather lightly used. It +is made to stand for everything, from what might be and should be +perfectly legitimate party organization, to the Southern Pacific +political bureau. The Southern Pacific political bureau is, as a matter +of fact, the dominating factor in machine affairs, which gives some +reason for dubbing the machine Southern Pacific. But it is nor more the +Southern Pacific machine than it is the Tenderloin machine or the +Racetrack gamblers' machine, or the United Railroads machine, or the +Electric Power Trust machine. + +[108] Bryce in his American Commonwealth, more than a quarter of a +century ago, showed the hollowness of the contention of the machine +element for arty consideration. "The interest of a Boss in political +questions," said Bryce in one of his admirable chapters on this subject, +"is usually quite secondary. Here and there one may be found and who is +a politician in the European sense, who, whether sincerely or not, +purports and professes to be interested in some principle or measure +affecting the welfare of the country. But the attachment of the ringster +is usually given wholly to the concrete party, that is, to the men who +compose it, regarded as office-holders or office-seekers; and there is +often not even a profession of zeal for any party doctrine. As a noted +politician happily observed to a friend of mine: 'You know, Mr. R., +there are no politics in politics.' " + +[109] One has a wider view of this condition if he look out beyond the +Sacramento Capitol, into the Senate Hall at Washington. The following is +from an editorial article which appeared in the Saturday Evening Post, +of June 12 last: + +"The Iron trade is still in a depressed state. Output is much below the +capacity of the mills, and prices have not recovered from the +demoralization of early spring. Yet the other day the common stock of +the Steel Trust sold higher than ever before. When issued, this common +stock was rather thinner than water, and it represented mostly a +capitalization of the Trust's tariff graft. At the new high price the +market valuation of the graft, therefore, is some three hundred million +dollars. A few days before this new high price was made, eighteen +Democratic Senators voted with the Aldrich Republicans to take iron ore +from the free list - where the House bill had put it - and protect it by +a substantial duty. This action was generally regarded as insuring a +continuation of the Trust's tariff graft. Hence a record price for the +common stock was logical enough, although the iron trade was not exactly +flourishing at the moment. + +"Similar acts by Democratic Senators were denounced by President +Cleveland as party perfidy and dishonor; but the regrettable fact is +there is only one party in the United States Senate - just one party, +with some scattering Republicans and Democratic Insurgents. For the +purpose of getting elected and making stump speeches, different labels +and catchwords are employed; but when it comes down to real business in +the matter of taxing eighty-odd million users of iron and steel products +for the benefit of an opulent trust, we find forty-three Republican +Senators and eighteen Democratic Senators staunchly voting aye, against +fourteen Republicans and ten Democrats who vote nay. + +"With over half of the Democratic members of the Upper House fondly +recording themselves as Little Brothers to Protection, there is slight +danger that the tariff will be revised otherwise than by its friends." + + + +Appendix + + + +Tables of Votes. + +The test votes given in the several tables record in every instance the +result of a contest between the machine and the anti-machine forces in +Senate or Assembly. It is quite evident that a unanimous vote cannot be +counted a test vote. Thus the unanimous vote by which the Reciprocal +Demurrage bill passed the Senate cannot be regarded as a test, although +the machine fought the demurrage principle viciously in 1907. + +Nor can a vote on a measure be taken as a test vote, where the vote was +taken without the members fully realizing what was before them. Thus the +votes on the Wheelan bills do not appear in either Senate or Assembly +tables. These measures were slipped through Senate and Assembly without +the members of either House fully realizing what the bills were, their +purpose, or far-reaching effects. To be sure, a member of the +Legislature should know what he is voting on, but when one considers the +incidents of the whirl-wind close of the session of 1909, the injustice +of holding a member accountable for inadvertently voting for a measure +which he had intended to oppose, becomes apparent. + +Following this rule, a vote on a given measure may be a test vote in one +House and not in the other. The Change of Venue bill is an example in +point. The Change of Venue bill was slipped through the Assembly, +without the members fully realizing its import, and hence without +opposition. But in the Senate the issue was fought out. The Senate vote +on the Change of Venue bill, then, is taken as a test vote, while the +Assembly vote on the same measure is not so regarded. In the same way, +the vote on the substitution of the Wright bill for the Stetson Railroad +Regulation bill was a test vote in the Senate. But in the Assembly there +was no test vote taken on the railroad regulation measures, for the +Wright bill was put through practically without opposition. The test +railroad vote in the Assembly came on the Sanford resolution providing +for government steamships on the Pacific. There was no test vote on this +in the Senate, for in the Senate it was adopted practically without +opposition. + + + +Table A - Records of Senators. + +The records of the members of the Senate on sixteen test votes are shown +in Table A. The names of the Senators are arranged in the order of the +number of times their votes were recorded on the side of progress and +reform, the name of the Senator with the most positive votes to his +credit appearing at the top of the list, and the Senator with the least +number at the bottom. + +While few will quarrel with the fact that Senator Bell's name leads the +list, while Senators Finn and Hartman divide negative honors at the +bottom, nevertheless the arrangement is not, strictly speaking, fair, +although it is probably as fair as it could be made. + +Senator Walker, for example, has only one anti-reform vote registered +against him, but it was, perhaps, the most important test vote of the +session, that on the Railroad Regulation measures. Senator Cutten, on +the other hand, voted on the reform side of every question with the +exception of the measure intended to work political reform by removing +the party circle from the election ballot. Senator Cutten is recorded +twice against this bill, it being necessary, in justice to all the +Senators, to give both the votes taken on this measure. But considering +the relative importance of the Railroad Regulation bills and the Party +Circle bill, all must admit that Senator Cutten made a better record +than Senator Walker, although Cutten's name appears below that of +Walker. + +Unavoidable absence from the Senate Chamber cut down the records of +several of the Senators. Black and Stetson, whose severe illness kept +them from Sacramento toward the end of the session, furnish examples of +this. + +Then again, the Party Circle bill and the Local Option bill were +measures on which several of the strongest of the opponents of the +machine differed with the majority of their anti-machine associates. +With the four votes taken on these two issues out of the reckoning, +Bell, Thompson, Roseberry, Cutten, Campbell, Boynton, Sanford, +Cartwright, Black, Holohan, Birdsall, Stetson, Rush and Strobridge, have +not one vote for a machine-backed policy against them. Caminetti's vote +to amend the Stanford bill excludes him from the list, but as this +measure was of the same character and policy as the Local Option bill, +Caminetti's name should in justice be included among those of the +Senators who made practically clear records. Looking at the table in a +broad way, the first nineteen Senators of the list made anti-machine +records. Of the eleven caucus Republicans among them, only one voted +against admitting Bell to the Republican caucus. + +The nineteen voted for the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill, they voted +every time against the machine on the Direct Primary issue, only two of +them voted for the Change of Venue bill, only two of them voted against +the Railroad Regulation bill. These comparisons can be carried out +indefinitely, and always to the advantage of the nineteen. + +Senator Wright is twentieth on the list; Senator Anthony is +twenty-first. Those who followed these two Senators through the Direct +Primary bill fight will see immediately that Wright has crowded into +undeserved standing. There is a very good reason for this. In the +Senate, the roll of Senators is called alphabetically, and Senator +Wright's name is the last on the list. A glance at the table will show +that Senator Wright did not vote once against the machine when his vote +would have decided the issue. He voted for the Anti-Racetrack Gambling +bill, but before him thirty-two Senators had voted for the bill, and +only seven against it. Wright's thirty-third affirmative vote counted +for nothing. On the other hand, when Wright's name was reached on roll +call on the Change of Venue bill, with the vote standing nineteen for +the bill and sixteen against, and twenty-one votes necessary for its +passage, Senator Wright cast the twentieth affirmative vote, thus +ensuring the measure's passage. In the same way, Senator Wright's vote +the following day, tied the score on the motion for a call of the +Senate, thus defeating the motion, and preventing reconsideration of the +Change of Venue bill which would have meant its defeat. + +The query is: Had the vote on the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill stood +nineteen against the bill, and twenty for, when Wright's name was +reached, with twenty-one votes necessary for its passage, would Wright's +vote have been cast for or against it? Any person who has any doubt on +the question, is referred to Senator Wright's part in the passage of the +amended Direct Primary bill, and in the defeat of the Stetson bill. + +It is most advantageous to have one's name at the bottom of a roll call. +Senator Wright's position above that of Senators Anthony and Burnett, +emphasizes the necessity of considering these tables in connection with +the chapters dealing with the several issues involved. From the first +days of the session Senators Anthony and Burnett gave indications that +had the anti-machine forces been organized, they would have been found +consistently against the machine. At any rate, their records are +admittedly more creditable than that made by Senator Wright. + + + +The Sixteen Test Votes. + +Senator Bell did not vote in the Senate Republican caucus, nor did the +nine Democratic Senators. Thus in the sixteen votes recorded, Bell and +the Democratic members voted only fifteen times. An outline of each of +the several issues involved follows: + +Senate A - The first test vote of the Republican majority which came in +the Republican caucus described in Chapter II, on motion to admit +Senator Bell to caucus privileges. Lost by a vote of 16 to 14. + +Senate B - Vote on proposed McCartney Amendments to Direct Primary bill. +Amendments defeated by vote of 27 to 13. See Chapter IX. + +Senate C - Senate vote on Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. See Chapter VII. + +Senate D - Vote on Wolfe's motion to send the Local Option bill back to +the Judiciary Committee. See Chapter XVIII. + +Senate E - First vote on Senate Bill 220, abolishing the party circle on +the election ballot. Measure was defeated by vote of 15 to 23. + +Senate F - Vote by which the above Senate Bill 220 was passed on +reconsideration. Note the Senators who changed to the side favoring the +measure. + +Senate G - Test vote on Senate Bill 1144, known as the "Stanford Bill," +which prohibited the sale of intoxicants within a mile and a half of a +University. The measure was aimed at the low groggeries maintained in +the vicinity of the campus at Stanford. It was fought by the same +tenderloin element that had opposed the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. +Senator Wolfe moved to amend the measure to exclude fraternal club +houses and hotels of fifty bed-rooms or more, from its provisions. The +amendment would have delayed and perhaps defeated the bill. Wolfe's +motion was defeated. + +Senate H - Vote by which the above Senate Bill 1144 was finally passed. + +Senate I - First test railroad vote in the Senate - Senator Stetson +moved that Stetson bill be substituted for the Wright bill. The motion +was defeated by a vote of 16 to 22. Had Rush and Roseberry been present +they would have voted on the side of the Stetson measure. This would +have made the vote twenty-two for the Wright bill, and eighteen for the +Stetson bill. See Chapter XIII. + +Senate J - Vote on the Initiative Amendment. See Chapter XIX. + +Senate K - Vote on the Local Option bill. See Chapter XVIII. + +Senate L - Vote on Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 4, to eliminate +ambiguities from those sections of the State Constitution which +prescribe the powers and duties of the Railroad Commission. See Chapter +XIV. + +Senate M - Vote on Assembly amendments to the Direct Primary bill. +Wright moved that the Senate concur in the amendments. The motion was +lost, but on Wolfe's motion to reconsider the vote, the Senate was held +in deadlock for more than a week. See Chapters X and XI. + +Senate N - Vote on Change of Venue bill. See Chapter XVI. + +Senate O - Vote on motion to reconsider vote by which Change of Venue +bill was passed. See Chapter XVI. + +Senate P - Vote on Burnett's motion that the investigation into the +causes for the increase of freight and express rates be continued after +the Legislature adjourned. See Chapter XIV. + + + +Tables B and C - Record of Assemblymen. + +The two tables showing the votes of the members of the Assembly include +eleven test votes. The names of the Assemblymen are arranged as in the +case of the Senators with the names of those who made the best records +at the top. + +It will be seen that fourteen Assemblymen voted against the machine on +every roll call, eight were absent on one roll call each, but voted the +ten times they were present against the machine, while three members +voted 'once each with the machine, and ten times against it. These +twenty-five members, voting 267 times, cast 264 votes on the side of +progress and reform, and three votes for machine policies. The record +indicates what might have been done in the Assembly had the reform +forces been organized. Indeed, the forty leading Assemblymen, casting +421 votes, cast only 48 votes for machine policies and 373 against. + +The same considerations governed the selection of test votes in the +Assembly as in the Senate. The votes are as follows: + +Assembly A - The first test vote in the Assembly was on Drew's +resolution to reject the report of the Committee on Rules. The +resolution was adopted, and the machine's plan to force "gag rules" on +the Assembly failed. See Chapter III Organization of the Assembly. + +Assembly B - The test vote on the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. The +Committee on Public Morals had recommended that the bill "do pass." Mott +moved that the bill be re-referred to the committee. Motion lost by a +vote of 53 to 23. See Chapter VII. + +Assembly C - Vote on the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. See Chapter VII. + +Assembly D - Vote on motion to reconsider the vote by which the +Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill was passed. See Chapter VII. + +Assembly E - The test railroad vote in the Assembly came on Drew's +motion to recall Senate Joint Resolution No. 3 from committee. The +resolution called for a line of government-owned steamships on the +Pacific from San Francisco to Panama. The resolution, having been +adopted by the Senate, went to the Assembly and was referred to the +Committee on Federal Relations. To hasten action on the resolution, Drew +moved that it be recalled from the committee. A two-thirds vote was +necessary for Drew's motion to prevail. The motion failed to carry by a +vote of 36 for to 29 against. + +Assembly F - Vote on motion to strike out of Senate joint Resolution No. +3-considered under E - those sections which referred to Commissioner +Bristow's report recommending that the Government steamship line be +established, and criticizing the combinations made between the several +transportation companies. The motion prevailed by a vote of 43 to 30. + +Assembly G - Assembly test vote on the Direct Primary bill. Vote taken +on Leed's motion that vote on United States Senators be advisory and by +districts. The motion prevailed by a vote of 38 to 36. See Chapter X. + +Assembly H - Vote on proposed amendments to the Islais Creek Harbor +bill. Motion was made to amend by substituting 44 blocks for the 63 +necessary for the improvement. Had this been done, the work would have +been made impracticable. Motion lost by a vote of 30 to 45. See Chapter +XXIII, "Influence of the San Francisco Delegation." + +Assembly I - Leeds moved that Senate Bill 220 removing the party circle +from the election ballot be denied second reading. The motion prevailed +by a vote of thirty-six for, to thirty-five against. + +Assembly J - Vote on Senate Bill 1144 (the Stanford bill), to prohibit +the sale of intoxicants within a mile and a half of Stanford University. + +Assembly K - Vote on the Judicial Column bill. This measure provided +that the names of candidates for the Judiciary be placed in a separate +non-partisan column on the election ballot. The bill passed the Senate, +but was defeated in the Assembly. + + + +The Other Tables. + +Table D shows the six votes on the Anti-Racetrack Gambling bill. See +Chapter VII. + +Tables E and F - Show the records of the San Francisco delegation in the +Senate and Assembly. See Chapter XXIII. + +Table G - Shows the records on sixteen test votes of the twenty Senators +whose terms of office will have expired before the next session +convenes. See Chapter XXVII. + +Table H - Shows the records on sixteen test votes of the twenty Senators +who were elected in 1908, and who hold over to serve in the session of +1911. See Chapter XXVI. + +Table I - Shows records of the members of the Assembly on the four +principal votes arising out of the fight for the passage of the +so-called Anti-Japanese bills. See Chapter XX. + + + + Table A-Records of Senators on Sixteen Test Votes + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + + A B C D E F G +__________________________________________________________________________ + To Test To refer To do Second + admit vote Walker- Local away Vote First + Bell on Otis Option Bill with party Vote + to Direct Bill. to Party Circle Stanford + Caucus. Primary Committee. Circle. Bill. Bill. +__________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +__________________________________________________________________________ + 1 Bell * * * * * * + 2 Thompson * * * * 0 * * + 3 Roseberry * * * * 0 * * + 4 Walker * * * * * * * + 5 Cutten * * * * 0 0 * + 6 Campbell * * * * * + 7 Boynton * * * 0 * * + 8 Sanford * * 0 * * * + 9 Cartwright * * * * * + 10 Caminetti * * 0 * * 0 + 11 Estudillo 0 * * * * * * + 12 Black * * * * 0 * * + 13 Holohan * * 0 * * + 14 Miller * * * * * + 15 Birdsall * * * 0 0 * + 16 Stetson * * * * * + 17 Rush * * * 0 * * + 18 Curtin * * * 0 * + 19 Strobridge * * * 0 0 0 * + 20 Wright 0 * * * * * * + 21 Anthony * * * 0 0 * + 22 Burnett 0 * * 0 0 0 + 23 McCartney 0 0 * 0 * + 24 Kennedy 0 * 0 * * 0 + 25 Lewis 0 * * 0 0 0 + 26 Willis 0 0 * * * * 0 + 27 Welch * * * 0 0 0 + 28 Bates 0 0 * * 0 0 * + 29 Price 0 * * 0 0 0 * + 30 Savage * 0 * 0 0 0 * + 31 Bills 0 0 * * 0 0 * + 32 Leavitt 0 0 0 * * * * + 33 Hare 0 0 0 * * 0 + 34 Hurd 0 * * 0 0 * + 35 Martinelli 0 * * 0 0 0 0 + 36 Wolfe 0 0 0 0 * * 0 + 37 Reily * 0 0 0 0 0 + 38 Weed 0 0 0 * 0 0 + 39 Finn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 40 Hartman 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +__________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 14 16 13 27 33 7 20 15 16 22 23 15 8 22 + + + + H I J K L M +______________________________________________________________________________ + Second Test Vote Local Assembly + Vote Railroad Initiative Option Railroad Amendment + Stanford Regulation. Amendment. Bill. Amendment. to Direct + Bill. Primary. +______________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +______________________________________________________________________________ + 1 Bell * * * * * * + 2 Thompson * * * * * * + 3 Roseberry * * * * * + 4 Walker * 0 * * * * + 5 Cutten * * * * * * + 6 Campbell * * * * * * + 7 Boynton * * * * * + 8 Sanford * * * 0 * * + 9 Cartwright * * * * * + 10 Caminetti * * * 0 * * + 11 Estudillo * 0 * * 0 * + 12 Black * * * * * + 13 Holohan * * 0 * * + 14 Miller * * 0 * * * + 15 Birdsall * * 0 * * + 16 Stetson * * * + 17 Rush * * 0 * * + 18 Curtin * * 0 0 * * + 19 Strobridge * * 0 * * + 20 Wright * 0 0 * * 0 + 21 Anthony * 0 * 0 0 * + 22 Burnett * 0 0 * 0 + 23 McCartney * 0 * 0 * 0 + 24 Kennedy 0 0 * 0 0 0 + 25 Lewis * * 0 0 0 0 + 26 Willis * 0 0 0 0 0 + 27 Welch 0 * 0 0 0 + 28 Bates * 0 0 0 + 29 Price * 0 0 0 0 0 + 30 Savage * 0 0 0 0 + 31 Bills * 0 0 0 0 0 + 32 Leavitt 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 33 Hare 0 0 * 0 0 + 34 Hurd 0 0 0 0 0 + 35 Martinelli * 0 0 0 0 + 36 Wolfe * 0 0 0 0 0 + 37 Reily 0 * 0 0 0 + 38 Weed 0 0 0 0 0 + 39 Finn 0 0 0 0 0 + 40 Hartman 0 0 0 0 0 0 +___________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 29 5 16 22 20 15 12 25 19 16 20 19 + + + + N O P +__________________________________________________________________ + To Test Totals + Change To To + of reconsider investigate For Against Absent + Venue Change of Freight Reform Reform + Bill. Venue Bill. Rates. +__________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No +__________________________________________________________________ + 1 Bell * * * 15 0 0 + 2 Thompson * * * 15 1 0 + 3 Roseberry * * * 14 1 1 + 4 Walker * * 14 1 1 + 5 Cutten * * * 14 2 0 + 6 Campbell * * 13 0 2 + 7 Boynton * * * 13 1 2 + 8 Sanford * * * 13 2 0 + 9 Cartwright * * 12 0 3 + 10 Caminetti * * * 12 3 0 + 11 Estudillo 0 * * 12 4 0 + 12 Black * * * 11 1 4 + 14 Miller 0 * 11 2 2 + 15 Birdsall * * * 11 3 2 + 16 Stetson * * 10 0 6 + 17 Rush * 10 2 4 + 18 Curtin * * 10 3 2 + 19 Strobridge * * 10 4 2 + 20 Wright 0 0 0 9 7 0 + 21 Anthony 0 0 7 8 1 + 22 Burnett * 5 7 4 + 23 McCartney 0 0 5 8 3 + 24 Kennedy * 0 5 9 1 + 25 Lewis 0 * 0 5 10 1 + 26 Willis 0 0 0 5 11 0 + 27 Welch 0 0 4 9 3 + 28 Bates 0 0 0 4 10 2 + 29 Price 0 0 4 11 1 + 30 Savage 0 0 0 4 11 1 + 31 Bills 0 0 0 4 12 0 + 32 Leavitt 0 0 0 4 12 0 + 33 Hare 0 0 3 10 2 + 34 Hurd 0 0 0 3 11 2 + 35 Martinelli 0 0 0 3 12 1 + 36 Wolfe 0 0 0 3 13 0 + 37 Reily 0 0 0 2 12 2 + 38 Weed 0 0 0 1 13 2 + 39 Finn 0 0 0 0 15 1 + 40 Hartman 0 0 0 0 16 0 + _________________________________________________________________ + Totals 21 16 18 18 12 16 311 259 60 + + + +Table B-Records of Assemblymen on Eleven Test Votes + + Forty Members Making Best Records + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + + A B C D E F +_________________________________________________________________________________ + Drew's To + Motion to To Return Vote on To To recall amend + Reject Walker-Otis Walker- reconsider S. J. R. S. J. + Committee's Bill to Otis Walker-Otis No. 3 +from R. No. + Rules. Committee Bill. Bill. Committee. 3. +_________________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye +No Aye No +_________________________________________________________________________________ + 1 Bohnett * * * * * +* + 2 Callan * * * * * +* + 3 Cattell * * * * * +* + 4 Costar * * * * * +* + 5 Gibbons * * * * * +* + 6 Hewitt * * * * * +* + 7 Johnson, P. H. * * * * * +* + 8 Mendenhall * * * * * +* + 9 Polsley * * * * * +* + 10 Preston * * * * * +* + 11 Telfer * * * * * +* + 12 Whitney * * * * * +* + 13 Wilson * * * * * +* + 14 Young * * * * * +* + 15 Cogswell * * * * +* + 16 Drew * * * * * +* + 17 Gillis * * * * +* + 18 Juilliard * * * * +* + 19 Kehoe * * * * +* + 20 Maher * * * * +* + 21 Sackett * * * * * +* + 22 Wyllie * * * * +* + 23 Flint * * * * * +* + 24 Hinkle * * * * * +* + 25 Stuckenbruck * * * * * +* + 26 Gerdes 0 * * * * + 27 Holmquist 0 * * * * +* + 28 Otis * * * * * 0 + 29 Irwin * * * * +* + 30 Rutherford * * * * * 0 + 31 Griffiths 0 * * * * + 32 Odom * 0 * * * + 33 Hayes * * * * +0 * + 34 Lightner * * * * 0 + 35 Melrose * * * * * 0 + 36 Silver * * * * * 0 + 37 Beatty * * * 0 + 38 Cronin * * * * * 0 + 39 Barndollar 0 * * * * 0 + 40 Rech * * * * 0 0 +________________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 32 4 1 38 40 0 0 40 33 +2 9 28 + + + + + G H I J K Totals +__________________________________________________________________________________ + To To deny + Test Vote amend Party Vote on Vote on + on Direct Islais Circle Stanford Judicial For +Against Absent + Primary. Creek Bill Bill. Column Reform Reform + Harbor Second Bill. + Bill. Reading. +__________________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +__________________________________________________________________________________ + 1 Bohnett * * * * * 11 0 0 + 2 Callan * * * * * 11 0 0 + 3 Cattell * * * * * 11 0 0 + 4 Costar * * * * * 11 0 0 + 5 Gibbons * * * * * 11 0 0 + 6 Hewitt * * * * * 11 0 0 + 7 Johnson, P. H. * * * * * 11 0 0 + 8 Mendenhall * * * * * 11 0 0 + 9 Polsley * * * * * 11 0 0 + 10 Preston * * * * * 11 0 0 + 11 Telfer * * * * * 11 0 0 + 12 Whitney * * * * * 11 0 0 + 13 Wilson * * * * * 11 0 0 + 14 Young * * * * * 11 0 0 + 15 Cogswell * * * * * 10 0 1 + 16 Drew * * * * 10 0 1 + 17 Gillis * * * * * 10 0 1 + 18 Juilliard * * * * * 10 0 1 + 19 Kehoe * * * * * 10 0 1 + 20 Maher * * * * * 10 0 1 + 21 Sackett * * * * 10 0 1 + 22 Wyllie * * * * * 10 0 1 + 23 Flint * * 0 * * 10 1 0 + 24 Hinkle * * 0 * * 10 1 0 + 25 Stuckenbruck * 0 * * * 10 1 0 + 26 Gerdes * * * * * 9 1 1 + 27 Holmquist * * * * 0 9 2 0 + 28 Otis * * 0 * * 9 2 0 + 29 Irwin * 0 * 0 * 8 2 1 + 30 Rutherford 0 * * * 0 8 3 0 + 31 Griffiths * * 0 * 7 2 2 + 32 Odom * 0 * * 7 2 2 + 33 Hayes * 0 0 * 7 3 1 + 34 Lightner 0 0 * * * 7 3 1 + 35 Melrose 0 * 0 * 0 7 4 0 + 36 Silver * 0 0 * 0 7 4 0 + 37 Beatty 0 * * 0 * 6 3 2 + 38 Cronin 0 * 0 0 6 4 1 + 39 Barndollar 0 * 0 * 0 6 5 0 + 40 Rech 0 * 0 * 0 6 5 0 +__________________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 7 33 6 34 10 28 36 2 31 7 373 48 19 + + + +Table C-Records of Assemblymen on Eleven Test Votes + + Forty Members Making Poorest Records + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + +(a) - Changed Vote from no to aye to give notice to reconsider. + Was against the bill. + + A B C D E +____________________________________________________________________________ + Drew's + Motion to To Return Vote on To To recall + Reject Walker-Otis Walker- reconsider S. J. R. + Committee's Bill to Otis Walker-Otis No. 3 from + Rules. Committee Bill. Bill. Committee. +____________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +____________________________________________________________________________ + 41 Hammon * * * * + 42 Hawk 0 * * * * + 43 Stanton 0 * * * * + 44 Transue 0 * * * + 45 Hanlon * * * * 0 + 46 Wagner * 0 * 0 * + 47 Webber * 0 * * 0 + 48 Butler * * * 0 + 49 Collum * 0 0 + 50 Dean 0 * * * 0 + 51 Perine 0 * * * + 52 Pulcifer 0 * * * 0 + 53 Collier 0 * * * 0 + 54 Moore 0 0 * 0 + 55 Leeds 0 * * * 0 + 56 Nelson 0 0 * * 0 + 57 Fleisher 0 * * * 0 + 58 Flavelle 0 * * * 0 + 59 McClelland 0 * * * 0 + 60 Beardslee 0 0 * 0 0 + 61 Hans 0 * * * 0 + 62 Johnson, G. L. 0 0 * 0 0 + 63 Baxter 0 0 0 + 64 Wheelan * * 0 + 65 Schmidt 0 0 0 0 + 66 Black * 0 0 0 + 67 O'Neil * 0 0 0 0 + 68 Coghlan 0 0 0 0 + 69 Hopkins * 0 0 0 + 70 Johnson, T. D. 0 0 * 0 0 + 71 Pugh 0 0 0 0 0 + 72 Feeley 0 * 0 0 + 73 Johnson, P. A. 0 0 * 0 0 + 74 Greer 0 0 * 0 0 + 75 Mott 0 0 * 0 0 + 76 Cullen 0 0 0 0 + 77 Beban 0 0 0 0 + 78 Macauley 0 0 0 0 0 + 79 McManus 0 0 0 0 0 +____________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 9 28 22 15 27 10 19 17 3 27 + Totals from Table B 32 4 1 38 40 0 0 40 33 2 + Grand Total 41 32 23 53 67 10 19 57 36 29 + + + + + + F G H I J K +_______________________________________________________________________ + To To To deny + amend Test Vote amend Party Vote on Vote on + S. J. on Direct Islais Circle Stanford Judicial + R. No. Primary. Creek Bill Bill. Column + 3. Harbor Second Bill. + Bill. Reading. +_________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +_________________________________________________________________________ + 41 Hammon 0 0 0 * + 42 Hawk * 0 0 0 0 + 43 Stanton 0 0 * 0 0 + 44 Transue 0 0 * 0 * 0 + 45 Hanlon 0 0 0 0 * 0 + 46 Wagner 0 0 * 0 * 0 + 47 Webber * + 48 Butler 0 0 * 0 + 49 Collum 0 0 * * 0 * + 50 Dean 0 * 0 0 + 51 Perine 0 0 0 0 * + 52 Pulcifer 0 0 0 * + 53 Collier 0 0 0 0 * + 54 Moore 0 * * 0 0 * + 55 Leeds 0 0 * 0 0 0 + 56 Nelson 0 0 * * 0 0 + 57 Fleisher 0 0 0 + 58 Flavelle 0 0 0 0 + 59 McClelland 0 0 0 0 0 + 60 Beardslee 0 * 0 0 * 0 + 61 Hans 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 62 Johnson, G. L. 0 0 0 * * 0 + 63 Baxter 0 0 * * + 64 Wheelan 0 0 0 0 + 65 Schmidt 0 * * (a) 0 + 66 Black 0 0 * 0 0 + 67 O'Neil 0 0 0 * + 68 Coghlan 0 0 * * 0 0 + 69 Hopkins 0 + 70 Johnson, T. D. 0 0 0 + 71 Pugh 0 0 * 0 + 72 Feeley 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 73 Johnson, P. A. 0 0 0 0 0 + 74 Greer 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 75 Mott 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 76 Cullen 0 0 0 0 0 + 77 Beban 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 78 Macauley 0 0 0 0 0 + 79 McManus 0 0 0 0 0 +_________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 34 2 31 3 24 11 26 7 9 15 4 22 + + Totals from Table B 9 28 7 33 6 34 10 28 36 2 31 7 + + Grand Total 43 30 38 36 30 45 36 35 45 17 35 29 + + + + + + Totals +___________________________________________ + For Against Absent + Reform Reform +___________________________________________ + Assemblymen +___________________________________________ + 42 Hawk 5 5 1 + 43 Stanton 5 5 1 + 44 Transue 5 5 1 + 45 Hanlon 5 6 0 + 46 Wagner 5 6 0 + 47 Webber 4 2 5 + 48 Butler 4 4 3 + 49 Collum 4 5 2 + 50 Dean 4 5 2 + 51 Perine 4 5 2 + 52 Pulcifer 4 5 2 + 53 Collier 4 6 1 + 54 Moore 4 6 1 + 55 Leeds 4 7 0 + 56 Nelson 4 7 0 + 57 Fleisher 3 5 3 + 58 Flavelle 3 6 2 + 59 McClelland 3 7 1 + 60 Beardslee 3 8 0 + 61 Hans 3 8 0 + 62 Johnson, G. L. 3 8 0 + 63 Baxter 2 5 4 + 64 Wheelan 2 5 4 + 65 Schmidt 2 6 3 + 66 Black 2 7 2 + 67 O'Neil 2 7 2 + 68 Coghlan 2 8 1 + 69 Hopkins 1 4 6 + 70 Johnson, T. D. 1 7 3 + 71 Pugh 1 8 2 + 72 Feeley 1 9 1 + 73 Johnson, P. A. 1 9 1 + 74 Greer 1 10 0 + 75 Mott 1 10 0 + 76 Cullen 0 9 2 + 77 Beban 0 10 1 + 78 Macauley 0 10 1 + 79 McManus 0 10 1 +________________________________________ + Totals 107 258 64 + Totals from Table B 373 48 19 + Grand Total 480 306 83 + + + +Table D-Record of Assemblymen on Anti-Racetrack Gambling Bill + (Walker-Otis Bill) + + F shows vote For the Bill + + A shows vote Against the Bill + + A B C D +__________________________________________________________ + Assembly Vote Motion to Reconsider Butler's Motion to + on Walker-Otis Return Bill Defeat of Motion Put Bill + Bill. to Mott's to Amend on its + Committee. Motion. Bill. Passage. +__________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +__________________________________________________________ + Barndollar F F F A + Baxter A A A A + Beardslee A A A A + Beatty F F F + Beban A A A A + Black A A A A + Bohnett F F F F + Butler F F A A + Callan F F F F + Cattell F F F F + Coghlan A A A A + Cogswell F F F + Collier F F F F + Collum A A A A + Costar F F F F + Cronin F F F F + Cullen A A A + Dean F F F F + Drew F F F F + Feeley A A A + Flavelle F F F F + Fleisher F F F F + Flint F F F F + Gerdes F F F F + Gibbons F A F + Gillis F F F F + Greer A A A A + Griffiths F F F F + Hammon F F F F + Hanlon F F F F + Hans F F F F + Hawk F A F F + Hayes F F F F + Hewitt F F F F + Hinkle F F F F + Holmquist F F F F + Hopkins A A A A + Irwin F A A A + Johnson, G. L. A A A A + Johnson, P. A. A A A A + Johnson, P. H. F + Johnston, T. D. A A A A + Juilliard F A A A + Kehoe F F F F + Leeds F F F F + Lightner F F F A + Macauley A A A A + Maher F F F A + McClellan F A F A + McManus A A A A + Melrose F F F F + Mendenhall F F F F + Moore A A F A + Mott A A F A + Nelson A A A A + Odom A A F A + Otis F F F F + O'Neil A A A A + Perine F F F A + Polsley F F F F + Preston F F F F + Pugh A A A A + Pulcifer F F F F + Rech F F F F + Rutherford F F F F + Sackett F F + Schmitt A A A A + Silver F F F F + Stanton F F F F + Stuckenbruck F F F F + Telfer F F F F + Transue F F F F + Wagner A A F F + Webber A A A A + Wheelan A A A + Whitney F F F F + Wilson F F F F + Wyatt + Wyllie F F F F + Young F F F F +__________________________________________________________ + Totals 23 53 30 48 23 52 44 32 + + + + E F Totals +__________________________________________________________ + Assembly Vote Vote Vote on For Against + on Walker-Otis on Motion to the the Absent. + Bill. Bill. Reconsider. Bill. Bill. +__________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No +__________________________________________________________ + Barndollar F F 5 1 + Baxter A 5 1 + Beardslee F A 1 5 + Beatty F F 5 1 + Beban A A 6 + Black A A 6 + Bohnett F F 6 + Butler F F 4 2 + Callan F F 6 + Cattell F F 6 + Coghlan A A 6 + Cogswell F F 5 1 + Collier F F 6 + Collum A 5 1 + Costar F F 6 + Cronin F F 6 + Cullen A A 5 1 + Dean F F 6 + Drew F F 6 + Feeley F A 1 4 1 + Flavelle F F 6 + Fleisher F F 6 + Flint F F 6 + Gerdes F F 6 + Gibbons F F 4 1 1 + Gillis F F 6 + Greer F A 1 5 + Griffiths F F 6 + Hammon F F 6 + Hanlon F F 6 + Hans F F 6 + Hawk F F 5 1 + Hayes F F 6 + Hewitt F F 6 + Hinkle F F 6 + Holmquist F F 6 + Hopkins A A 6 + Irwin F F 3 3 + Johnson, G. L. F A 1 5 + Johnson, P. A. F A 1 5 + Johnson, P. H. F F 3 3 + Johnston, T. D. F A 1 5 + Juilliard F F 3 3 + Kehoe F F 6 + Leeds F F 6 + Lightner F F 5 1 + Macauley A A 6 + Maher F F 5 1 + McClellan F F 4 2 + McManus A A 6 + Melrose F F 6 + Mendenhall F F 6 + Moore F 2 3 1 + Mott F A 2 4 + Nelson F F 2 4 + Odom F F 3 3 + Otis F F 6 + O'Neil A A 6 + Perine F F 5 1 + Polsley F F 6 + Preston F F 6 + Pugh A A 6 + Pulcifer F F 6 + Rech F F 6 + Rutherford F F 6 + Sackett F F 4 2 + Schmitt A 5 1 + Silver F F 6 + Stanton F F 6 + Stuckenbruck F F 6 + Telfer F F 6 + Transue F F 6 + Wagner F A 3 3 + Webber F F 2 4 + Wheelan F 1 3 2 + Whitney F F 6 + Wilson F F 6 + Wyatt + Wyllie F F 6 + Young F F 6 +________________________________________________________ + Totals 67 10 19 57 321 137 16 + + + +Table E-Records of the San Francisco Senate Delegation on Sixteen Test Votes + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + + A B C D E F G H +______________________________________________________________________________ + To Test To refer To do Second + admit vote Walker- Local away Vote First Second + Bell on Otis Option Bill with party Vote Vote + to Direct Bill. to Party Circle Stanford Stanford + Caucus. Primary Committee. Circle. Bill. Bill. Bill. +______________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +______________________________________________________________________________ + Anthony * * * 0 0 * * + Burnett 0 * * 0 0 0 * + Finn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Hare 0 0 0 * * 0 0 + Hartman 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Kennedy 0 * 0 * * 0 0 + Reily * 0 0 0 0 0 + Welch * * * 0 0 0 + Wolfe 0 0 0 0 * * 0 * +______________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 3 4 6 3 4 5 9 0 3 6 4 5 5 0 3 4 + + + + + I J K L M N O +_______________________________________________________________________________ + + Test Vote Local Assembly Change To + Railroad Initiative Option Railroad Amendment of reconsider + Regulation. Amendment. Bill. Amendment. to Direct Venue Change of + Primary. Bill. +Venue Bill. +________________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +________________________________________________________________________________ + Anthony 0 * 0 0 * 0 0 + Burnett 0 0 * 0 + Finn 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Hare 0 * 0 0 0 0 + Hartman 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Kennedy 0 * 0 0 0 * + Reily 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 + Welch 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 + Wolfe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +________________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 0 9 5 2 0 9 1 7 8 1 7 1 0 7 + + + + + P Totals +__________________________________ + To + investigate For Against + Freight Reform Reform + Rates. +__________________________________ + Senator Aye No +__________________________________ + Anthony 0 7 8 + Burnett * 5 7 + Finn 0 0 15 + Hare 3 10 + Hartman 0 0 16 + Kennedy 0 5 9 + Reily 0 2 12 + Welch 0 4 9 + Wolfe 0 3 13 +__________________________________ + Totals 1 6 29 99 + + + +Table F-Records of San Francisco Assembly Delegation on Eleven Test Votes + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + +(a) - Changed Vote from no to aye to give notice to reconsider. + Was against the bill. + + A B C D E F +______________________________________________________________________________ + Drew's To + Motion to To Return Vote on To To recall amend + Reject Walker-Otis Walker- reconsider S. J. R. S. J. + Committee's Bill to Otis Walker-Otis No. 3 from R. No. + Rules. Committee Bill. Bill. Committee. 3. +______________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +______________________________________________________________________________ + Beatty * * * 0 + Beban 0 0 0 0 0 + Black * 0 0 0 + Callan * * * * * * + Coghlan 0 0 0 0 0 + Collum * 0 0 0 + Cullen 0 0 0 0 0 + Gerdes 0 * * * * + Hopkins * 0 0 0 0 + Lightner * * * * 0 + Macauley 0 0 0 0 0 0 + McManus 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Nelson 0 0 * * 0 0 + O'Neil * 0 0 0 0 0 + Pugh 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Perine 0 * * * 0 + Schmitt 0 0 0 0 + Wheelan * * 0 0 +______________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 7 10 12 5 7 10 10 6 2 7 14 1 + + + + + G H I J K Totals +________________________________________________________________________________ + To To deny + Test Vote amend Party Vote on Vote on + on Direct Islais Circle Stanford Judicial For Against Absent + Primary. Creek Bill Bill. Column Reform Reform + Harbor Second Bill. + Bill. Reading. +________________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +________________________________________________________________________________ + Beatty 0 * * 0 * 6 3 2 + Beban 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 + Black 0 0 * 0 0 2 7 2 + Callan * * * * * 11 0 0 + Coghlan 0 * * 0 0 2 8 1 + Collum 0 * * 0 * 4 5 2 + Cullen 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 + Gerdes * * * * * 9 1 1 + Hopkins 1 4 6 + Lightner 0 0 * * * 7 3 1 + Macauley 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 + McManus 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 + Nelson 0 * * 0 0 4 7 0 + O'Neil 0 0 * 2 7 2 + Pugh 0 * 0 1 8 2 + Perine 0 0 0 * 4 5 2 + Schmitt 0 * a* 0 2 6 3 + Wheelan 0 0 0 2 5 4 +________________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 15 2 9 8 5 9 5 9 5 7 57 108 33 + + + +Table G-Records of Out-Going Senators on Sixteen Test Votes + + Must Be Re-Elected to Sit in Next Senate + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + + A B C D E F G +________________________________________________________________________ + To Test To refer To do Second + admit vote Walker- Local away Vote First + Bell on Otis Option Bill with party Vote + to Direct Bill. to Party Circle Stanford + Caucus. Primary Committee. Circle. Bill. Bill. +________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +________________________________________________________________________ + Anthony * * * 0 0 * + Bates 0 0 * * 0 0 * + Bell * * * * * * + Black * * * * 0 * * + Boynton * * * 0 * * + Caminetti * * 0 * * 0 + Cartwright * * * * * + Curtin * * * 0 * + Hartman 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Kennedy 0 * 0 * * 0 + Leavitt 0 0 0 * * * * + McCartney 0 0 * 0 * + Miller * * * * * + Price 0 * * 0 0 0 * + Reily * 0 0 0 0 0 + Sanford * * 0 * * * + Savage * 0 * 0 0 0 * + Weed 0 0 0 * 0 0 + Willis 0 0 * * * * 0 + Wright 0 * * * * * * +________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 5 8 9 11 16 4 10 8 10 9 12 6 4 12 + + + + + H I J K L M +___________________________________________________________________________ + Second Test Vote Local Assembly + Vote Railroad Initiative Option Railroad Amendment + Stanford Regulation. Amendment. Bill. Amendment. to Direct + Bill. Primary. +___________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +___________________________________________________________________________ + Anthony * 0 * 0 0 * + Bates * 0 0 0 + Bell * * * * * * + Black * * * * * + Boynton * * * * * + Caminetti * * * 0 * * + Cartwright * * * * * + Curtin * * 0 0 * * + Hartman 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Kennedy 0 0 * 0 0 0 + Leavitt 0 0 0 0 0 0 + McCartney * 0 * 0 * 0 + Miller * * 0 * * * + Price * 0 0 0 0 0 + Reily 0 * 0 0 0 + Sanford * * * 0 * * + Savage * 0 0 0 0 + Weed 0 0 0 0 0 + Willis * 0 0 0 0 0 + Wright * 0 0 * * 0 +___________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 14 3 8 12 9 10 6 12 9 9 11 9 + + + + + O P Totals +__________________________________________________ + To To + reconsider investigate For Against + Change of Freight Reform Reform + Venue Bill. Rates. +__________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No +__________________________________________________ + Anthony 0 0 7 8 + Bates 0 0 4 10 + Bell * * 15 0 + Black 11 1 + Boynton * * 13 1 + Caminetti * * 12 3 + Cartwright * 12 0 + Curtin * 10 3 + Hartman 0 0 0 16 + Kennedy 0 5 9 + Leavitt 0 0 4 12 + McCartney 0 5 8 + Miller * 0 11 2 + Price 0 4 11 + Reily 0 0 2 12 + Sanford * * 13 2 + Savage 0 0 4 11 + Weed 0 0 1 13 + Willis 0 0 5 11 + Wright 0 0 9 7 +__________________________________________________ + Totals 7 11 4 10 147 140 + + + + +Table H-Records of Holdover Senators on Sixteen Test Votes + + * indicates vote on side of Progress and Reform + + 0 indicates vote against Progress and Reform + + A B C D E F G +________________________________________________________________________ + To Test To refer To do Second + admit vote Walker- Local away Vote First + Bell on Otis Option Bill with party Vote + to Direct Bill. to Party Circle Stanford + Caucus. Primary Committee. Circle. Bill. Bill. +________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +________________________________________________________________________ + Bills 0 0 * * 0 0 * + Birdsall * * * 0 0 * + Burnett 0 * * 0 0 0 + Campbell * * * * * + Cutten * * * * 0 0 * + Estudillo 0 * * * * * * + Finn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + Hare 0 0 0 * * 0 + Holohan * * 0 * * + Hurd 0 * * 0 0 * + Lewis 0 * * 0 0 0 + Martinelli 0 * * 0 0 0 0 + Roseberry * * * * 0 * * + Rush * * * 0 * * + Stetson * * * * * + Strobridge * * * 0 0 0 * + Thompson * * * * 0 * * + Walker * * * * * * * + Welch * * * 0 0 0 + Wolfe 0 0 0 0 * * 0 +________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 9 8 4 16 17 3 10 7 6 13 11 9 4 10 + + + + + H I J K L M +___________________________________________________________________________ + Second Test Vote Local Assembly + Vote Railroad Initiative Option Railroad Amendment + Stanford Regulation. Amendment. Bill. Amendment. to Direct + Bill. Primary. +___________________________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +___________________________________________________________________________ + Bills * 0 0 0 0 0 + Birdsall * * 0 * * + Burnett * 0 0 * 0 + Campbell * * * * * * + Cutten * * * * * * + Estudillo * 0 * * 0 * + Finn 0 0 0 0 0 + Hare 0 0 * 0 0 + Holohan * * 0 * * + Hurd 0 0 0 0 0 + Lewis * * 0 0 0 0 + Martinelli * 0 0 0 0 + Roseberry * * * * * + Rush * * 0 * * + Stetson * * * + Strobridge * * 0 * * + Thompson * * * * * * + Walker * 0 * * * * + Welch 0 * 0 0 0 + Wolfe * 0 0 0 0 0 +___________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 2 8 10 11 5 6 13 10 7 9 10 9 + + + + + N O P Totals +_________________________________________________________ + Change To To + of reconsider investigate For Against + Venue Change of Freight Reform Reform + Bill. Venue Bill. Rates. +_________________________________________________________ + Senator Aye No Aye No Aye No +_________________________________________________________ + Bills 0 0 0 4 12 + Birdsall * * * 11 3 + Burnett * 5 7 + Campbell * * 13 0 + Cutten * * * 14 2 + Estudillo 0 * * 12 4 + Finn 0 0 0 15 + Hare 0 0 0 3 11 + Holohan * * * 11 2 + Hurd 0 0 0 3 11 + Lewis 0 * 0 5 10 + Martinelli 0 0 0 3 12 + Roseberry * * * 14 1 + Rush * 10 2 + Stetson * * 10 0 + Strobridge * * 10 4 + Thompson * * * 15 1 + Walker * * 14 1 + Welch 0 0 0 4 9 + Wolfe 0 0 0 3 13 +_________________________________________________________ + Totals 9 9 11 7 8 6 164 119 + + + + + Table I-Records of Assemblymen on Four Test Votes on Anti-Japanese Bills + + F shows vote For the Bill + + A shows vote Against the Bill + + * Leeds changed his vote from "no" to "aye" to give notice of + reconsideration. + + A B C D +___________________________________________________________________________ + Assembly Vote on Assembly Assembly First Vote Second Vote + Walker-Otis Bill. Bill No. Bill No. Assembly Bill Assembly Bill + 78. 32. No. 14. No. 14. +___________________________________________________________________________ + Assemblymen Aye No Aye No Aye No Aye No +___________________________________________________________________________ + Barndollar A A A A + Baxter F F F F + Beardslee A A A A + Beatty F F F F + Beban A F F A + Black F F F F + Bohnett A A F A + Butler A A F F + Callan F F F F + Cattell A A A A + Coghlan A A + Cogswell A A A A + Collier A A A A + Collum F F F F + Costar A A A A + Cronin F F F F + Cullen F F F F + Dean A A A A + Drew F F + Feeley A A A A + Flavelle A + Fleisher A A A A + Flint A A A A + Gerdes F + Gibbons F F F F + Gillis F F F F + Greer A A A A + Griffiths A A A A + Hammon A A A A + Hanlon A A A A + Hans A A A A + Hawk A A A A + Hayes A F F F + Hewitt A A A A + Hinkle A A F A + Holmquist A A F A + Hopkins F F F F + Irwin F A F F + Johnson, G. L. F F F F + Johnson, P. A. A F A A + Johnson, P. H. F F F F + Johnston, T. D. A F F F + Juilliard F F F F + Kehoe A F F F + Leeds A A F* A + Lightner A F F F + Macauley F F F F + Maher F F F F + McClellan A A A A + McManus A F F F + Melrose A A A A + Mendenhall F F F F + Moore A A A A + Mott A F F F + Nelson F F F F + Odom F F F + Otis A F F F + O'Neil F F F F + Perine A F F A + Polsley F F F F + Preston F A F A + Pugh F F F F + Pulcifer A A A A + Rech A A A A + Rutherford A A + Sackett A A A A + Schmitt A F F A + Silver A F F A + Stanton A A A A + Stuckenbruck F F F F + Telfer F F F F + Transue A A A A + Wagner A A A A + Webber F F F + Wheelan F F F F + Whitney A F F F + Wilson F F F F + Wyatt + Wyllie A A F A + Young A A A A +___________________________________________________________________________ + Totals 28 48 39 35 46 28 37 41 + + + +Outline of and Arguements in Favor of +the Postal Direct Primary. + + + +By Senator L. H. Roseberry, Who Introduced the Postal Direct Primary +Bill at the Session of 1909. + + + +In order to understand the full purpose and effect of the proposed +Postal Direct Primary law, it is necessary to ascertain the purpose of +any system of nominations by a Direct Primary. + +The sole complaint against the present system of nominations by +conventions is based upon the objection that party nominations are made +by a few interested parties, and that the popular choice is absolutely +ignored. To remedy this evil the system of direct nominations by the +voters has been suggested at primary elections. It therefore follows +that that system, or primary, which will get out the largest number of +votes or the greatest expression of the people on the choice of +candidates is, of necessity, the best primary law. If it is true that +all present direct primaries, which provide for voting at a certain time +and place in person, in the form that general elections are now +conducted, only draw out a little over one-half of the registered vote +of all parties, it then follows beyond question, that all present direct +primary laws are only half successful. Upon an examination of statistics +gathered from the various States in which direct primary laws are now in +operation, it is seen that only 55% to 60% of the registered vote within +those States has ever been cast at any single primary election. For +instance, at the primary election held in the State of Oregon in the +fall of 1908, 55% of the registered Republican vote was cast, and less +than 25% of the Democratic vote. In the State of Washington about 57% of +the registered vote was cast in 1908, the only vote yet taken under the +new Direct Primary law. In the State of Wisconsin, while 60% of the +total registered vote was cast in 1906, only a little over 40% was cast +at the primary election held In the year 1908. Other statistics could be +offered from all the other States, having the direct primary system of +nominations, from which it would appear that practically a little over +55% or even less of the registered vote has been secured at any direct +primary election. Therefore, based upon these figures, it becomes patent +that the present form of direct nominations, to wit: voting at a certain +time and place in person only, under the same rules and regulations as +at general elections, is only half successful. + +It was for the purpose of bringing out at least a part of this great +unvoted 45% of qualified electors, to take a part in naming the +candidates who should go before the people at the general elections, +that the Postal Direct Primary law was conceived. + +While there is no present example of the working of a system of direct +nominations through a ballot cast through the mails for public +officials, there are a number of instances in which ballots are being +taken by mail with wonderful success and completeness. Formerly, labor +unions, fraternal societies, chambers of commerce, Granger +organizations, alumni associations, and other civic, religious and +benevolent associations, balloted on propositions submitted to their +membership in the form that primary and general elections are now held +in public elections. The vote secured from their memberships was so +meager and unsatisfactory that the system of voting by mail was +inaugurated, and with such splendid results, that now it is being used +exclusively by a majority of the above organizations, as a method of +voting upon propositions and officers coming before them for election. +Where only 10% to 15% of the votes were cast under the old plan of +voting in person at a particular time and place, 75%, and even 90% of +the votes are now cast through the mails, and it is significant to note +that the plan of voting by mail has been found by the organizations +using it to be free from any objections. This fact, together with the +unanimous vote cast, led to the idea of casting votes by mail at direct +primaries for the nomination of public officers by political parties. +The system that has been proposed is extremely simple, and it appears +highly reasonable and practicable. A short outline of the provisions of +the bill will assist in an understanding of the arguments offered in its +favor and those advanced to refute the objections urged against this +Postal Direct Primary Act. + +In the first place, each elector, at the time of registering, declares +his party allegiance, and this is entered upon his original affidavit of +registration. At the same time, he is given a party voting number, which +is written or printed upon his affidavit of registration. The Secretary +of State, every four years, declares the color of ballots to be used by +each party separately. For instance, all Republican ballots throughout +the State, at every election must be printed upon pink colored paper and +none other; the Democratic ballot upon white colored paper and none +other, and so on among the other political parties. + +In order for a candidate's name to be proposed to go on to the primary +ballot, it must be proposed by a prescribed number of qualified +electors, within the district in which that candidate is to be elected, +which names must be subscribed to a verified petition. This entitles the +candidate's name to be printed upon the primary ballot. Within ten days +before the primary, or return day, the clerk of the board or body which +is delegated by law to prepare for election matters must print, prepare +and send out, primary election ballots for each separate political party +through the United States mails in the following manner: To each elector +within the jurisdiction is mailed a plain unmarked envelope, addressed +to the business or home address of each separate elector, containing a +self-addressed and stamped return envelope, returnable to the Board of +Election of that precinct, together with one party primary election +ballot, for the use of that elector. If the elector happens to be a +Republican the color of his ballot will be pink, and only the names of +the Republican candidates will be printed thereon. On the outside end of +the ballot is printed the elector's party voting number, which voting +number is separate and distinct from every other voting number in that +precinct. On the outside end of the return envelope is a line left for +the original signature of the elector to whom the ballot is mailed, +whereon he must either subscribe his signature in ink, or if he be an +incapable voter, and is assisted, must have his own name subscribed +thereon, together with the names of two freeholders in that precinct, +who assisted him in voting. Upon receipt of the envelope containing his +ballot, the voter marks a cross (X) at the names of the candidates for +whom he votes, and then folds his ballot so that all the names thereon +are turned inside and out of sight, and his party voting number appears +on the outside end of the envelope. (In the same manner that he now +folds his ballot at a general election.) He then encloses this ballot in +the stamped return envelope, seals the same, signs his name on the end +of the envelope, and deposits it in a postoffice box. It then goes to +the postoffice directed by law, addressed to the Primary or Return +Board, who alone are authorized by law to receive these envelopes from +the postmaster, and then only on the day and hour designated by law and +in public. Upon return day, the Board receives all of these primary +election envelopes from the postoffice, takes them to a public place, +and after counting the number received, and comparing with the number +originally sent out, compares each signature on each envelope with the +same signature subscribed on the original affidavit of registration, and +if it be genuine, opening the envelope, removing the ballot therefrom, +without opening the same, observing that the color of the ballot +corresponds to the party color to which that elector belongs, then +tearing off the voting number, which appears on the end of the ballot, +after comparing it with the voting number written on that elector's +affidavit of registration, and then finally depositing the ballot into a +general ballot box, into which all the ballots of each political party +are deposited. It will thus appear that every ballot has been checked in +three ways to identify it as being the original ballot sent to that +elector, and as the one cast personally by him: First, it was contained +in an envelope bearing his original signature; it bore his own party +voting number, which was separate and distinct from every other party +voting number in that precinct, and was printed under the authority of +law only upon one ballot, namely, the ballot he receives; and finally it +was upon the color of paper which only the political party with which +that elector was affiliated was allowed by law to use. Every other +political party's ballots were printed upon different colored paper. + +This makes it practically impossible for any ballot to be cast or +counted other than the one lawfully mailed and regularly received and +voted and mailed in person by the elector to whom it was sent. + +Even the most prejudiced opponents of the Postal Direct Primary bill +admit that there are no practical reasons why it would not operate very +successfully in the rural districts and the smaller cities and towns. +Such an admission is a very far-reaching argument for the bill as a +general working measure for direct nominations. It is an open confession +that the plan is workable and meritorious. The only objection that has +been urged with any semblance of force is the argument that the ballot +could be easily corrupted in large cities, where the opportunities for +fraud are great, and where the intelligence and honesty of certain +classes of voters is low. It is suggested with considerable merit that +among the foreign and ignorant classes in the great centers of +population, corruption of suffrage is a matter easily accomplished; that +there would be many of such voters willing to lend themselves to any +scheme to deliver their primary ballots to certain persons to be voted +as they desired under the names of the Individual electors. + +At first blush, this argument appears to have some force, but upon close +reading of the provisions of the bill, and its necessary effect upon the +Practical operation of a primary campaign, it must be admitted that this +sole objection is largely argumentative. In the first place, as pointed +out above, each ballot must be cast by the person to whom it was sent, +for it is contained in an envelope bearing the elector's own known +signature. Therefore none other can vote the ballot. In the second +place, the bill provides for extreme penal penalties for any one +tampering with ballots, assisting a voter in the marking of a ballot +(other than incapable voters), standing about and watching an elector +mark his ballot, or in any wise influencing, or observing a voter in the +marking of his ballot at the time it is voted, sealed in the envelope +and dropped in the postoffice. All the penalties are for imprisonment +and not for fines. This, then, will force any plan to secure ballots or +corrupt the same to be done secretly and illegally. It must appear that +there can be no extensive system of vote corruption carried on without +discovery. It must further appear that there would be extremely few who +would care to general or direct any extensive plan of corrupting or +influencing primary ballots. It would be too risky a proceeding. If then +votes were corrupted, it would have to be done very secretly and amongst +only a trusted few. Therefore the percentage influenced in this manner +could not be large. + +Another bar to any tampering with ballots would be the check which each +political party and each candidate would have upon the other. It would +be a matter of political capital for one party to detect leaders or +organizations within another party tampering with or corrupting the vote +at its primary election. The various candidates for the different +offices within the same party would watch one another with extreme +vigilance to detect any attempt to influence or corrupt the ballots +against them. + +Lastly, it is suggested that because of the fact that these primary +election ballots would be sent at the same time to thousands of +different places throughout the precinct and city, and would be opened +in offices and in homes on the same day, and in all probability fully +75% of them would be voted and remailed on the same day received; that +it would be practically impossible to devise any system that would reach +out and get these countless ballots in a thousand different places +within a space of a few hours or a day. They would be too scattered to +be gotten hold of or traced with any degree of success. + +It must appear from a broad-minded consideration of the practical +workings of this Postal Direct Primary law that there is no valid reason +why it would not work with splendid success even in the congested and +illiterate districts of our larger cities. But even admitting for the +sake of argument that a certain percentage of the ignorant and vicious +vote could be corrupted by the bosses, it certainly could not be large. +It could not possibly exceed ten per cent of the registered vote. In +light of the fact that this system would bring out at least twenty-five +per cent more votes than any other primary law has ever succeeded in +bringing out, it is seen at a glance that the corrupted vote would be +far outweighed and overbalanced by the much larger percentage of decent +vote that would be secured for the first time by means of this postal +system of voting. The argument, then, is unanswerable in favor of this +Postal Direct Primary law. + +And it would for the first time give the intelligent and honest elements +in all political parties the direct control of the power of nomination +for public offices. Moreover, the mere fact that it would cause a larger +number of people to vote would be of inestimable value, for it would +tend to rouse and awaken public interest in civic affairs and by thus +doing would educate and train the minds of the better classes in +election affairs, and could not help but raise the honesty and power of +popular suffrage. In other words, it would accomplish in the fullest +degree, the results sought to be obtained by every direct primary law, +namely, a popular choice of candidates for public office, with the power +of selection for once actually in the hands of the honest electors. + +In conclusion, it might be well to mention that this system of voting by +mail would protect the suffrage of many of our best citizens, who, under +present laws, are practically disfranchised. Such men are travelers, the +sick, sailors, trainmen, and other men who, by reason of their +occupation or misfortune, are forced to be absent from the place of +their voting precincts on election day, but who could and would vote if +an opportunity was extended to them to vote by mail. This would +constitute no small class of voters. + + + +Dr. Montgomery's Report. + +55 Dr. Montgomery's report to the Senate was as follows: + +Palo Alto, Cal., March 22, 1909. + +Lieutenant-Governor Warren R. Porter, + +President State Senate, Sacramento, Cal. + +On the afternoon of March 21, 1909, about 4:30 p. m., J. L. Martin, +Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate of the State of California, called on me +and informed me that I had been designated by the President of the +Senate to proceed with him to Palo Alto, and to consult with the +physicians of Senator Marshall Black, to ascertain if Senator Black's +health was such as to permit him to go to Sacramento. I arrived at the +office of Dr. Howard Black, Senator Black's physician, at about 9:30 p. +m., March 21, 1909, and there met Dr. Howard Black, Dr. H. B. Reynolds, +Dr. J. C. Spencer and Dr. R. L. Wilbur. These physicians said they had +held a consultation and had made an examination of Senator Marshall +Black that afternoon; according to their statement, Senator Marshall +Black had arrived in Palo Alto about five days previously suffering from +inflammation of the eyes, commonly called "pink eye," and that this +inflammation of the eyes had almost entirely cleared up, but that the +inflammation traveled down the throat and bronchial tubes. According to +their statement to me on the evening of March 21, 1909, Senator Marshall +Black was suffering from broncho-pneumonia, and symptoms of inflammation +in the lower lobe of the left lung, the temperature that afternoon was +ninety-nine and the pulse ninety. The heart was in good condition. The +cough was severe and the expectoration abundant. I stated to these +physicians that I was delegated by the Senate of the State of California +to make a thorough and complete examination of Senator Black for the +purpose of ascertaining at what time it would be safe for Senator Black +to proceed to Sacramento. I was informed by Dr. Howard Black that +Senator Marshall Black would not permit me to see him. I then asked +Senator Black's physicians, individually and collectively, if in their +opinion, in Senator Black's present physical condition any serious +inconvenience or injury would accrue to Senator Black from a personal +examination by me. They all stated that, on their part, they were +perfectly willing that such examination should be held by the Senate +physician, and that such an examination in their opinion could do no +injury. I asked if the patient was in sound and disposing mind. I was +answered he was. At about 10 a. m., March 22, 1909, I again called on +Dr. Howard Black, renewing my request of the previous evening +to see Senator Marshall Black. Senator Black, through the physician, +still declined to receive me. I then asked Dr. Howard Black when, in his +opinion, Senator Marshall Black would be in condition to proceed to +Sacramento. He said that at the consultation of the previous day it was +concluded that it would be a week before Senator Black would be in such +a condition as to enable him with safety to undertake the Journey. As +this consultation was held on March 21st, it would, in their opinion, be +March 28th before Senator Black would be in a condition to proceed to +Sacramento. I asked if, in his opinion, Senator Black was convalescing. +He said that in his opinion he was. He said that Senator Black's +temperature this morning was 100, his pulse 90, his cough still severe, +and there still was evidence of inflammation in the lower lobe of the +left lung. Personally, from what I know of Senator Black's physicians, I +believe these facts to be true. Taking it for granted that these facts +are true, I do not find that, from them alone, I can conclude that +Senator Black is unable to proceed to Sacramento. In order to concur in +this opinion of Senator Black's physicians I would have to see the +patient. + + + +Douglass W. Montgomery, M. D. + +Delegated by Lieutenant-Governor Warren R. Porter to examine into the +state of health of Senator Marshall Black. + + + +The Anti-Japanese Bill's Resolution. + +94 The resolution was in full as follows: + +Whereas, Assembly Bill, No. 14, introduced by Mr. Johnson of Sacramento, +and reading as follows: + + + +An Act + + + +To Amend Section 1662 of the Political Code + +The people of the State of California, represented in Senate and +Assembly, do enact as follows: + +Section 1. Section 1662 of the Political Code is hereby amended so as to +read as follows: + +1662. Every school, unless otherwise provided by law, must be open for +the admission of all children between six and twenty-one years of age +residing in the district and the board of school trustees, or city board +of education, have power to admit adults and children not residing in +the district, whenever good reasons exist therefor. Trustees shall have +the power to exclude children of filthy or vicious habits, or children +suffering from contagious or infectious diseases, and also to establish +separate schools for Indian children and for the children of Mongolian, +or Japanese, or Chinese descent. When such separate schools are +established, Indian, Chinese, Japanese or Mongolian children must not be +admitted into any other school; provided, that in cities and towns in +which the kindergarten has been adopted or may hereafter be adopted as +part of the public primary schools, children may be admitted to such +kindergarten classes at the age of four years; and provided further, +that in cities or school districts in which separate classes have been +or may hereafter be established, for the instruction of the deaf, +children may be admitted to such classes at the age of three years. + +Is now pending before this Assembly; and + +Whereas, It has been represented by the President of the United States +that the passage of this bill will, in some manner undisclosed, disturb +the relations now existing between the government of the United States +and the government of Japan; and + +Whereas, The President of the United States has made known to this +Assembly, through the Governor of this State and through the Speaker of +this Assembly, his wish that said bill be not passed; and + +Whereas, The President of the United States has caused it to be +represented to this body that it is his judgment that said bill would +conflict with the treaty now existing between the government of the +United States and the government of Japan, and because of such conflict +the passage of such bill would be beyond the power of the Legislature of +this State, and + +Whereas, The Governor of this State and the Speaker of this Assembly +have conveyed to this body their desire that this bill be not passed; +and + +Whereas, It is the desire of this body to accede to the wishes of the +Chief Executive of this State, and the Speaker of this Assembly; +therefore be it + +Resolved, That it is fitting and proper that a statement of the position +of this Assembly upon this question be made, to the end that a mistaken +impression do not result from the failure of the Assembly to pass this +bill; be it further + +Resolved, That such position is as follows: + +1. The school system of the State of California is an institution of the +State alone, maintained, supported, conducted and controlled wholly +under and in accordance with the powers reserved to the State. + +2. That the power to maintain, conduct and control the State school +system has not been granted to the Federal Government. + +3. That the Legislature of California may properly pass any law relative +to the school system of this State that in its judgment may seem best. + +4. That by said Assembly Bill No. 14 it is not designed to deprive +children of Indian, Mongolian, Chinese, or Japanese descent of equal +school privileges and opportunities, but, on the contrary, to these +there shall be given, and for these there shall be provided the same +privileges and opportunities as are given to and provided for all other +children. + +5. That Assembly Bill No. 14 contemplates the establishment and +maintenance of separate schools for different races, but all schools so +established and maintained shall afford equal and the same facilities +for instruction. + +6. That this Assembly recognize it to be a duty resting upon the State +to furnish to children of Indian, Mongolian, Chinese, or Japanese +descent the same facilities and opportunities as are furnished to +children of other races and affirm that no more can be required and that +nothing different is contemplated by said Act. That said Act gives to +children of Indian, Mongolian, Chinese, or Japanese descent who are +subjects of other countries the same rights and privileges as are given +to native born citizens of California, and no power has the right to +demand more. That this Assembly is disposed to accede to the wishes of +the Federal Government as conveyed to us by the Governor of this State +and the Speaker of this Assembly, but while doing so we reaffirm and +reassert that the subject matter of Assembly Bill No. 14 is purely and +exclusively a matter of State concern, falling within the reserve powers +of the State, and violates no provision of the Federal Constitution. + +7. That it is the judgment of this Assembly that said bill does not +conflict with the treaty existing between the government of the United +States and the government of Japan, and that we recognize the authority +to make treaties is by the Federal Constitution, vested in the President +and Senate of the United States, we affirm that the right to administer +our State school system can not be controlled by treaty made by the +President and the Senate of the United States, nor by action of the +President alone. + +8. And finally, while we recognize that Assembly Bill No. 14 +is drawn and could be passed by the Legislature of this State in full +conformity with the powers reserved to the State and vouchsafed to it by +the Federal Constitution, we are unwilling to do aught which may disturb +the relations existing between this government and a friendly power, and +for this reason alone, we recommend that Assembly Bill No. 14 be +reconsidered and withdrawn. + + + + + +End of The Project Gutenberg Etext of The California Legislature of 1909 + |