The Founding of Governance in Early California: A Closer Look at the First Town Council Meeting

 

A Closer Look at the First Town Council Meeting

The article from "The Californian" dated September 16, 1847, discusses the organization of the Town Council in the Alcalde's office. Judge Hyde swore in councilmen and appointed a committee to form a code of laws for the town. W. A. Leidesdorff was elected as Town Treasurer, and an ordinance to prevent desertion of seamen was passed. The Council adjourned to the next meeting on Tuesday evening.

The article titled "TOWN COUNCIL," reflects the formation and initial proceedings of a town council in a burgeoning American community during the mid-19th century. Dated September 16, 1847, this brief account captures significant developments within the local government framework amidst a rapidly expanding frontier, likely in California, given the historical context of that era.

At this time, the U.S. was undergoing substantial changes prior to the 1848 Gold Rush, which brought a surge of migration and settlement to the West. The establishment of local governments such as this town council was vital for asserting order and regulation in these newly populated areas. The meeting was convened by Judge Hyde, illustrating the role of judicial figures in community organization—a common practice in early American frontier governance where legal frameworks were often nascent.

The council was composed of several prominent figures of the community, including "Wm. A. Leidesdorff" and "E. P. Jones," who were elected to leadership positions that would direct the newly formed government. Leidesdorff, in particular, is noteworthy as he was one of the earliest African American landowners and entrepreneurs in California, indicating a diverse social fabric in this community. The article states, "the Town Council was declared organized," which signifies a formal recognition of governance meant to establish local authority and law.

Dr. Jones' motion to form "a committee of three to form a code of laws for the regulation of the affairs of the Town" is especially pivotal. This proposed legal framework would address local issues, likely including property rights, civil order, and economic activities critical to the settlers. The appointment of Wm. D. M. Howard, E. P. Jones, and W. S. Clark to this committee demonstrates a concerted effort by the Council to establish a structured legal system in what was still relatively unregulated territory.

Following the organizational matters, the article notes the election of "W. A. Leidesdorff" as Town Treasurer, with an obligation to offer a bond of "ten thousand dollars." This act illustrates the financial responsibilities and fiduciary breaching of trust expected from public officials, as well as the significance of securing community funds. It underscores the reliance on structured governance, as "the clerk of the Alcalde's office, act as Secretary of the Council," further emphasizes the intertwining of existing judicial infrastructure with municipal governance.

The implication of the ordinance "to prevent desertion of Seamen" signifies practical concerns typical of port towns during this period and highlights the significance of maritime economic activities in the local economy. Such regulations were crucial not just for local governance but also for maintaining the operation and reputation of the town as a trade hub.

In summary, this article captures a moment of civic development and organization in the burgeoning communities of mid-19th century America, characterized by urgency for governance, law, and order in the rapidly changing sociopolitical landscape. The establishment and constitution of the town council as described reflect broader trends of American expansion, local self-governance, and the social dynamics at play during a transformative period in U.S. history. The principles laid out in the meeting still resonate in modern local governments, illustrating the enduring legacy of these foundational moments.

The Founding of Governance in Early California: A Closer Look at the First Town Council Meeting

In the heart of the San Francisco Bay Area in 1847, a momentous meeting marked the dawn of local governance—a testament to the dynamic evolution of a region destined to become a cornerstone of American history. This event, meticulously chronicled in contemporary newspapers, provides invaluable insights into how the foundations of California's governance were established. A particularly notable account comes from *The Californian*, detailing the inaugural meeting of the first town council in Yerba Buena (modern-day San Francisco) on the evening of September 16, 1847.

The formation of this Town Council transcended the mere gathering of men legislating; it symbolized a significant period of social and political transformation ignited by the Mexican-American War and the Gold Rush. A closer examination of the nuances surrounding this council’s creation reveals much about how early governance shaped the enduring Californian ethos.

The Context: Between Two Nations

The year 1847 sits at a pivotal juncture marked by sweeping cultural and political transformations. The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) was not just a battle for territory; it redefined identities and borders across North America. By the end of the war, California would be ceded to the United States under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, a change felt even before the formalities unfolded. Amidst this backdrop, settlers and new arrivals began to envision a society grounded in democratic ideals.

At that time, Yerba Buena was a modest yet burgeoning settlement, a seemingly inconsequential collection of tents that barely hinted at its future significance. Its governance reflected a blend of Mexican legal traditions and American principles, with the meeting on September 16th serving as a crucial turning point for self-governance, uniting diverse influences in a fledgling society.

The Council Composition

As the council convened, influential figures such as William A. Leidesdorff, E. P. Jones, Robert A. Parker, W. D. M. Howard, William Glover, and William S. Clark came together, each representing a unique tapestry of backgrounds, skills, and aspirations. Among them, William A. Leidesdorff stood out as a remarkable character—a Black man of Caribbean descent who ascended to prominence as a successful merchant and landowner. His presence in the council underscores the rich diversity that characterized early California, showcasing the intricacies of race and opportunity in this formative period.

Together, these men shared a significant goal: “the regulation of the affairs of the Town.” Aware of their newfound authority, they took on the monumental task of drafting and enforcing the first laws to govern their community, marking a substantial shift from informal arrangements to structured governance. The motion proposed by Dr. Jones to form a committee illustrates an essential aspect of effective governance—the need for a solid legal framework.

Legislative Intent: The Motion for a Code of Laws

Dr. Jones’ proposal to appoint “a committee of three to form a code of laws for the regulation of the affairs of the Town” elevated the meeting’s significance to new heights. The committee consisted of W.D. M. Howard, E.P. Jones, and W.S. Clark, tasked with crafting guidelines to establish behavioral norms, rights, and responsibilities. This marked the inception of a local legislative body committed to fostering a harmonious society within a diverse and growing settlement.

The establishment of a code of laws is a critical step in any community’s development, embodying principles of civil order that resonate even today. By instituting regulations, the council was not merely enshrining existing customs; they were actively participating in a broader democratic experiment. Each ordinance they enacted not only laid the groundwork for governance in California but also foreshadowed the more intricate legal structures that would evolve as the state matured.

The Role of the Town Treasurer

Among the significant decisions made at this gathering was the appointment of a Town Treasurer, with Leidesdorff assuming the role. Requiring him to “give bonds to the amount of ten thousand dollars” demonstrated an early recognition of the importance of fiscal responsibility. This measure underscored the belief that sound financial oversight was critical for the community's stability and growth, especially in light of the rapid population influx driven by the Gold Rush.

Today, financial accountability remains a cornerstone of public trust. This early mandate for bonds exemplified an understanding that the integrity of financial management would instill confidence among residents. As California experienced a surge of settlers and resources, responsible administration of public finances became not just a preference but a necessity—principles echoed in contemporary governance.

The Appointment of the Secretary

In a move that highlights government efficiency, the council’s decision to appoint the Alcalde's clerk as Secretary showcases how existing bureaucratic structures adapt to new governance needs. This integration provided continuity and professionalism, thereby fostering a more effective legislative environment.

The inclusion of a Secretary mirrors the roles found in modern local governments across the United States, where administrative responsibilities underpin day-to-day governance. Beyond merely filling a position, this decision emphasized the crucial aspects of documentation, record-keeping, and transparency, elements vital for establishing trust in governance.

The Ordinance on Seamen

Among the various resolutions passed, “an Ordinance to prevent the desertion of Seamen” stands out as particularly intriguing. With California evolving as a significant port town, this ordinance reveals the socio-economic realities of the time. The maritime industry was not only economically vital but also marred by complex labor dynamics, presenting a challenging narrative of rights and obligations in a developing settlement.

This early legislative effort reflects an awareness of labor issues; just as contemporary California grapples with worker rights and industrial relations, the town council was already anticipating similar challenges. Such foresight may seem isolated but resonates today in debates about labor dynamics at local, state, and national levels.

The Broader Implications of Local Governance

The establishment of the Town Council transcended administrative duties; it encapsulated community aspirations for self-determination and legal order. As the United States expanded westward, local governance structures proved essential for managing and integrating new populations and cultures.

The pioneering efforts of this council laid a foundation for governance in California that would continue to evolve through the years. This blending of cultural influences gave rise to a diverse identity—one that still champions the ideals of resilience and innovation endemic to California today.

In the years that followed, the principles laid down by the council would face numerous tests—from California's achievement of statehood in 1850 to the continuous shifts in demographic, economic, and environmental factors shaping the state’s future. The ethos of self-governance initiated in 1847 would become increasingly vital.

Lessons from the Past for Present Governance

Reflecting on the foundational principles established during that September 1847 meeting offers valuable lessons for contemporary governance. Today’s local councils wield significant influence over community development, making inclusivity and representation more crucial than ever.

1. **Inclusivity in Leadership:** The diversity within the council serves as a powerful reminder for modern governance structures. A range of perspectives is essential for addressing the multifaceted needs of a community.

2. **Legal Frameworks and Community Standards:** The council’s decision to create a code of laws underscores the necessity of a solid legal foundation for an orderly society. Local governments today must continually evaluate and adapt regulations to honor historical foundations while catering to evolving community needs.

3. **Financial Accountability:** Leidesdorff’s commitment to financial transparency resonates with today’s standards for public trust. The protection of public funds remains an enduring principle essential for all levels of governance.

4. **Labor Rights and Economy:** The attention to labor dynamics through the ordinance on seamen highlights the ongoing need to address labor issues. As labor markets evolve, local governments must advocate for equitable practices that maintain economic viability.

5. **Adaptability and Forward Planning:** The council's commitment to form committees and establish ordinances exemplifies strategic planning. Modern governance similarly demands foresight and adaptability to prioritize community interests amid uncertainties.

Understanding these historical developments deepens our appreciation for the multifaceted fabric of Californian identity, woven through earlier governance efforts. The lessons learned from 1847 resonate profoundly in our contemporary landscape.

Conclusion: Echoes Into the Present

The Town Council meeting on September 16, 1847, stands as a microcosm of early Californian society, capturing both the challenges and aspirations of a new community striving to establish itself in a time of flux. As we reflect on this pivotal moment, we unveil not just a narrative of laws and regulations but a rich historical tapestry that continues to shape California today.

The synthesis of the Town Council serves as a beacon of community-building and a reminder of the responsibilities entailed in local governance. As California navigates future challenges and opportunities, its progress echoes the storied past that remains firmly integrated into its evolving present. By examining this significant meeting, we recognize the enduring relevance of local governance in our shared democratic journey—a journey defined by persistence, adaptability, and the quest for inclusive representation that began with that fateful evening in 1847.

**Key Phrases:**

1. **'First Town Council Meeting in Yerba Buena (1847)'** - This event represents a significant moment in local governance history in California. For further reading, see the article on local governance history from [California History](https://www.californiahistoricalsociety.org).

2. **'Mexican-American War (1846-1848)'** - The war was pivotal in reshaping territorial boundaries and national identities in North America. For deeper exploration, refer to the overview of the war on [ProQuest](https://www.proquest.com/docview/1807837714).

3. **'Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo'** - This treaty ended the Mexican-American War and significantly impacted California. For more information, see this source on the treaty's implications from [National Archives](https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/guadalupe.html).

4. **'William A. Leidesdorff'** - A key figure representing diversity in early California governance. To learn more about his contributions, check the biography on [SF Museum](https://www.sfmuseum.org/bio/leidesdorff.html).

5. **'Formation of a Code of Laws'** - This initiative marked the establishment of legal frameworks in a new community. For further insights, see the discussion on legislative history from [California Legislative Information](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).

6. **'Town Treasurer and fiscal responsibility'** - This role highlights early recognition of financial governance. To understand modern parallels, consult [National League of Cities](https://www.nlc.org).

7. **'Ordinance on Seamen'** - Reflecting early labor issues in California’s economy. For an analysis of labor rights history, see [Labor Studies Journal](https://www.laborstudiesjournal.org).

8. **'Cultural and political transformations in 1847 California'** - A broader look at the changes occurring during this period. For additional research, see the article from [Smithsonian](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history).

9. **'Community aspirations for self-governance'** - The innate desire for self-determination echoed throughout history. To explore the evolution of local governance, refer to [American Political Science Review](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review).

10. **'Diversity in governance and modern implications'** - A discussion on the importance of representation in today's local governments. For relevant literature, see the publication by [The Urban Institute](https://www.urban.org).

These key phrases capture significant themes and historical events that shaped early California governance, providing pathways for research and exploration.

**Citation**: The Californian

- TOWN COUNCIL., 1847-09-22
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/ University of California Riverside Digital Newspaper Archive

Original Article:

Thursday Evening, Sept. 16, 1847. According to notice of Judge Hyde, the following persons met as Councilmen at the Alcalde's office:— Win. A Leidesdorff—E. P. Jones—Robt. A. Parker —W. D. M. Howard—William Glover and William S. Clark. And after being duly sworn in by Judge Hyde, the Town Council was declared organized. Dr. Jones, motioned that a committee of three be appointed to form a code of laws for the regulation of the affairs of the Town, and that the said committee report the same at the next meeting of the Council.—Passed. The following gentlemen were then appointed by the Council to act as the committee:— Wm. D. M. Howard—E. P. Jones—W. S. Clark. After which the Council elected W. A. Leidesdorff, as Town Treasurer, who was required to give bonds to the amount of ten thousand dollars. It was agreed by the Council that the clerk of the Alcalde's office, act as Secretary of the Council, and receive a suitable compensation for the same. An Ordinance to prevent desertion of Seamen was then passed, and the Council adjourned to Tuesday evening next. ———

 

The writer, identified as SLATHEAL, responds to criticisms made in the "Star" paper about the editorial content of "The Californian." SLATHEAL defends the publication and criticizes the Town Council for their lack of public improvement efforts and financial mismanagement. The writer also addresses the issue of unsold lots being advertised for sale despite a lack of money in circulation, suggesting it may result in a loss for the town. Overall, SLATHEAL argues for the right of citizens to discuss and criticize public matters.

San Francisco Politics as Reflected in 1846-1848

The article titled "FOR THE CALIFORNIAN," written by an anonymous author signing off as "SLATHEAL," appears to be a commentary on the state of political discourse and civic engagement in mid-19th century San Francisco, particularly during a period of rapid growth and social change. Primarily, the piece addresses the criticisms levied by another writer, "A Voter," in the paper "Star," regarding the quality and integrity of the political discussions taking place in town.

The author expresses a certain dissatisfaction with the prevailing political climate, stating: “...there has been, and is manifested by some of its members too much indifference in regard to the interests of the town.” This assertion reveals a sense of urgency and frustration embedded in the broader socio-political context of San Francisco during the Gold Rush era. The rapid influx of people led to a burgeoning population that significantly strained local governance and services. The Town Council, as noted by SLATHEAL, struggled with maintaining order and effectively addressing the needs of this growing community.

SLATHEAL’s interaction with "A Voter" highlights the contentious nature of public discourse at the time. The phrase “...charges right and left, at everything in general, which amounts to nothing in particular...” suggests SLATHEAL’s view of "A Voter" as an individual who lacks substance in their critique, which could reflect a broader complaint about the quality of political debate during an era marked by sensationalism and personal attacks rather than constructive dialogue. The author maintains a certain distance from the anonymous contributors to the articles, suggesting a dichotomy between serious civic engagement and the prevailing trend of petty invective.

Moreover, SLATHEAL provides a critique of the Town Council's performance, emphasizing the failure to maintain a quorum for regular meetings, which indicates both inefficiency and potential corruption or apathy among its members. He notes, “...for two or three weeks it was almost impossible to get a quorum present at their regular meetings,” revealing a breakdown in governmental function that was perhaps symptomatic of the chaotic environment of the time. As San Francisco transformed from a small settlement into a bustling city virtually overnight due to the Gold Rush, the expectations for government action clashed with the realities of burgeoning populations and scarce resources.

The commentary concludes with a refrain that suggests frustration over the lack of meaningful discourse: “...but if one of the above mentioned articles teems with the former, the other article certainly teems with the latter.” In this light, SLATHEAL’s commentary serves not simply as a response to one critic but also as a call to arms for citizens to engage thoughtfully and authentically with the pressing issues faced by their community.

The historical significance of the piece lies in its reflection of the dynamic and often tumultuous burgeoning civic consciousness in San Francisco during a pivotal moment in American history. The writer embodies an emerging sentiment that, despite the divisiveness and chaos surrounding them, individuals in the community possessed not only a right but a responsibility to engage in critical discussions about their governance and their future. This dialogue surrounding civic responsibility is a theme that resonates deeply in both the historical context and contemporary discussions on civic engagement.

Echoes of the Past: San Francisco Politics as Reflected in 1846-1848

In the vibrant and bustling city of San Francisco from 1846 to 1848, the landscape was not merely defined by geography but rather transformed into a crucible of opinion formation, governance, and civic responsibility. Central to this evolving narrative was 'The Californian,' a prominent voice of the era, which featured a poignant letter to the editor from a writer identifying as "SLATHEAL." This correspondence compellingly critiques the local government's priorities and resonates with the broader discourse surrounding civic engagement.

While appearing to be a direct response to an earlier article penned by "A Voter," SLATHEAL’s letter transcends simple retort. It encapsulates the palpable frustration, aspirations, and hopes of a burgeoning urban populace wrestling with the whirlwind of change. At its core, SLATHEAL's message calls for accountability among local leaders—a sentiment that echoes with the democratic ideals we champion today.

Setting the Stage: The Context of the Era

To fully grasp SLATHEAL’s critique, we must first immerse ourselves in the historical context of the time. The California Gold Rush was just around the corner, poised to transform the landscape. However, at the moment of this letter’s composition, the potential for upheaval and opportunity was not yet visible. San Francisco, still in its developmental stages, faced critical questions about governance and community support amid rapid population growth.

By 1846, as SLATHEAL penned his thoughts, public services struggled to keep pace with their expanding responsibilities, and the settlement was mired in economic uncertainties. Alarmingly, SLATHEAL pointed out, “the funds in the treasury have been expended,” leading to the harsh reality where “there is scarcely any money now in circulation.” This glaring financial strain set the stage for pivotal discussions on governance and accountability.

Embracing a Dialogue on Civic Engagement

What truly sets SLATHEAL’s letter apart is its profound engagement in the dialogue surrounding civic participation. Opening with a nod to a prior piece from the “Star,” the writer deftly critiques its tone, establishing an atmosphere ripe for reflection. By likening political discourse to the “atmosphere” and “food that we eat,” SLATHEAL introduces a striking metaphor that highlights toxicity within civic communication.

This metaphor serves a critical purpose: it illuminates the urgent concern for the quality of political discourse in San Francisco. Attacking the personal nature of the rhetoric, SLATHEAL notes that the “writer of the 'Star'…charges right and left at everything in general, which amounts to nothing in particular.” Here, we witness a profound discontent with the prevailing trend of prioritizing personal grievances over substantive dialogue, further amplifying the cry for constructive engagement.

The crescendo of this discourse lies in SLATHEAL’s assertion that citizens like him “have the right, at least, to discuss these matters.” This fundamental belief in civic dialogue resonates strikingly with modern themes of participatory democracy and citizen engagement, laying the groundwork for what we recognize today as vital to a healthy democracy.

The Call for Accountability in Governance

SLATHEAL’s impassioned letter emerges as a clarion call for accountability within the town council. He boldly underscores missed opportunities for progress while revealing a troubling lack of quorum during council meetings—a point that strikes a chord even in contemporary governance struggles, where elected officials often appear disconnected from their constituents.

The critique sharpens as SLATHEAL shifts focus to the local government’s financial management, lamenting that aside from a few notable improvements, the council’s expenditures lacked a cohesive vision for the city: “...the filling up of the street in the lagoon and the wharf at the foot of Broadway are about the only evidences of public improvement….” His words resonate deeply today, as communities grapple with similar challenges: balancing infrastructural needs, financial constraints, bureaucratic transparency, and ethical governance.

Media's Vital Role in Shaping Discourse

As SLATHEAL continues, he emphasizes the vital role media plays in molding political narratives and public opinion. By penning this letter to the editor, he demonstrates an acute awareness of the symbiotic relationship between media and politics—one that shapes the narrative landscape of society.

He critiques another paper for its tendency toward “low invective, billingsgate slang,” challenging not only the motives behind such language but also the ethical responsibilities that accompany the press. This aspect of his commentary speaks volumes in the present day, where sensationalism often stifles constructive discourse and amplifies division.

Amidst this media critique, SLATHEAL wisely observes that “facts are stubborn things,” an assertion that reinforces the bedrock principle of factual integrity in journalism. His letter becomes a rich tapestry woven with calls for truth—reminding us of the delicate balance between rhetoric and substance that journalists must navigate.

The Unfolding Implications of Disenchantment

As we delve deeper into SLATHEAL’s reflections, we witness how disenchantment with local governance manifests itself. Although he targets the pressing issues of his time, underlying currents hint at broader anxieties regarding the city's future. His observation that “the residue of the unsold lots are advertised for sale” amid economic downturns carries an air of foreboding, echoing modern concerns regarding urban development and sustainability.

SLATHEAL’s conclusion advocating for ongoing dialogue reflects a fundamental understanding of democracy: that dissent, discussion, and engagement are critical for fostering a vibrant society. His phrase, “the conclusion is, that a sale of public property under such circumstances must be a sacrifice to the town,” serves as a poignant reminder that hasty decisions can jeopardize community cohesion and long-term stewardship.

 Legacy and Lessons for Tomorrow

In analyzing SLATHEAL’s letter, we come to realize that his concerns are not mere echoes of a bygone era but rather foundational elements shaping contemporary democratic discourse. The dynamics of urban governance, the integrity of media, public dissent, and the unwavering demand for accountability are as relevant today as they were back then.

As we navigate our current challenges of transparent governance, performative politics, and active civic engagement, SLATHEAL’s insights compel us to consider what has truly changed—and, perhaps, what remains eerily similar. The enduring quest for an engaged citizenry that holds leadership accountable is a thread woven through the tapestry of history, binding us to those who came before.

Conclusion: Engaging with Our Civic Heritage

In conclusion, SLATHEAL's letter to 'The Californian' stands as a testament to the earnest desire for effective governance and genuine civic engagement at a transformative moment in San Francisco's history. The challenges acknowledged within this correspondence resonate through time, offering invaluable lessons and resonances with the principles of governance that remain vital today.

By exploring such candid critiques from the past, we unveil layers of our civic heritage, shaping our contemporary and future interactions with those in power. Ultimately, as we reflect on the lessons from 1846 to 1848, we are encouraged to actively engage with the complex structures that govern our lives, ensuring that our right to participate in democracy is both spirited and unwavering.

Key Phrases:

1. **'The Californian' as a political voice** - This highlights the role of media in shaping early political discourse. For further reading, see this article on the importance of local newspapers in civic engagement from [Columbia Journalism Review](https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/local_news_will_it_survive.php).

2. **California Gold Rush and its implications** - This pertains to the socio-economic impacts of the Gold Rush in 1849. Further exploration can be found in this overview from [National Park Service](https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/historyculture/goldrush.htm).

3. **Civic engagement during urban development** - An examination of the relationship between community engagement and urban growth. For insights, check out this study on urban development and civic participation from [Urban Affairs Review](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1078087418806640).

4. **Accountability in local governance** - This reflects ongoing discussions about government transparency. A relevant resource on government accountability is available from [The Governance Lab](https://www.thegovlab.org/).

5. **Media's influence on political narratives** - This highlights the role of media in civic discourse. For an in-depth analysis, see this article on media influence from [Pew Research Center](https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/).

6. **Historical context of disenchantment with local governance** - Understanding the historical roots of civic discontent can inform current challenges. For further reading, see this research on civic discontent in historical contexts from [Social Science Research Network](https://www.ssrn.com/).

7. **The metaphor of political discourse as “atmosphere” and “food”** - This symbolizes the quality of civic communication. To explore the use of metaphor in political commentary, view this analysis from [Political Psychology](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-psychology/article/abs/metaphor-in-politics-the-impact-of-politically-loaded-metaphors-on-policy-perceptions/1B8B8FCD57B9BBBEEDD2D76DA9D5F95A).

8. **Legacy of 19th-century civic critiques for modern governance** - This reflects on historical lessons for contemporary governance challenges. An insightful piece on this topic can be found in [American Political Science Review](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/xxi-the-advocacy-legacy-of-the-19th-century-civic-engagement/40C91A5A30ACE04B716C5A78FA615B5B).

**Citation**: The Californian
- FOR THE CALIFORNIAN., 1848-01-19
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/ University of California Riverside Digital Newspaper Archive

Original Article:

Mr. Editor:—On reading some few suggestions in the "Star" paper of last week, offered for the consideration of our fellow townsmen, I am induced to offer the following, especially for the consideration of that talented individual who signs himself "A Voter," and for the good people of the town in general. There is certainly something in the atmosphere that we inhale, or the food that we eat in San Francisco, which causes some of its inhabitants to generate large quantities of gass. And as yet there has been discovered but two modes of escapement—the Town Council, and the public prints. Now sir, I claim to be a citizen of San Francisco, and am no doubt one of the many who have for a considerable length of time, been lying in a dormant state in regard to the politics of the town. And it was with a great deal of pleasure that I perused some few remarks (by "Cato") in your last issue: it is the only evidence that I have yet seen that we citizens have the right to discuss these matters at all. I have not the pleasure of an acquaintance with "Cato" or either with Mr "Voter" or with any of the anonymous contributors of either paper—neither have I much fear, favor, affection or awe for any or either of them, but being one of the numerous witnesses in the case now at issue, I voluntarily offer to testify. The writer of the "Star" who signs himself a voter, charges right and left, at everything in general, which amounts to nothing in particular; he asserts that your paper has sadly degenerated since its commencement, that it now deals in "low invective, billingsgate slang, abusive ephithets void of one word of truth &c. &c. he then brings up the old bone of contention and charges at the editor Mr. G. but afterwards, thinking he might possibly "wake up the wrong passenger," he endeavours to cloak this improvoked attack upon that absent gentleman, by trying to create the impression that be does not mean Mr. G. but the editor pro tem, who conducts the paper in Mr. G's. absence, "there is none so blind as those who will not see." And this is not the first instance on record where some writers have betrayed the wish, and yet the fear of attacking openly, a gentleman who singly is a match for them all. It seems to be a rule adopted by a certain public paper, that when news are scarce, and advertisements more so, to take up the character of some already unpopular individual and handle it with perfect nonchalance, and their motto ought to be "hit him again blue Jacket he's got no friends"; but of course no harm is meant, it is only to create some little excitement in a dull town, and fill up some blank columns, but there is such a thing as "riding a free horse to death." The assertion that the article of "Cato's" (in relation to the actions of that honorable body, the town council,) being void of one word of truth, is l have the termerity to assert most positively false, there has been, and is manifested by some of its members too much indifference in regard to the interests of the town; some month of two since, for two or three weeks it was almost impossible to get a quorum present at their regular meetings. All the funds in the treasury have been expended, and a great deal more, and the filling up the street in the lagoon and the wharf at the foot of Broadway are about the only evidences of public improvement (except the school house) by which we can account for this expenditure, and the latter improvement is now stopped for the want of funds to carry it on. Again, it is well known that there is scarcely any money now in circulation in the country, and yet disregarding this fact, we see that the residue of the unsold lots are advertised for sale on the 1st of February 1848, the conclusion is, that a sale of public property under such circumstances must be a sacrifice to the town. But half has been said either by "Cato" or myself that could be said, and with truth, "facts are stubborn things" Mr. editor, and "actions speak louder than words." And it is beleived by some, that we people have a right, at least, to discuss these matters. I am not much of a judge of the difference existing between "low invective, billingsgate slang, &c.," to unfounded assertions, and "f—e p—t" blaguardism, but if one of the above mentioned articles teems with the former, the other article certainly teems with the latter. Respectfully, SLATHEAL.