Forward Preface

The Sourisseau Academy for California State and Local History The essays in this volume are the fruits of a special project of San Jose State University takes pride in presenting its first undertaken by the students of a graduate United States history number in a projected series, "Odginal Research in Santa Clara seminar at San Jose State University on Spring, 1973. The seminar County History - Student Publications." members decided to make a case study of Progressivism - concen· .~ The essays in this publication, edited by Professor David W. trating on Progressive Era municipal reform in San Jose and Santa Eakins, represent some of the best student research and writing Cruz and using local research sources. The study is an introduction­ that has taken place on this university campus on the subject of to the topic and is not intended to be the final word. Nevertheless, California and local history. Congratulations are in order to despite such limitations as the time available for the project and Professor Eakins for all his efforts on behalf of student scholarship the incompleteness of some of the recold (the scarcity of material in the History Department. about - or oy - the opponents of reform, themselves, for The Sourisseau Academy intends to continue this puolication example), we believe this study sheds valuable light on some of the program, and we look .forward to more such presentations in the backgr<;mn d to present San Jose and its institutions. near future. . • The work was jointly done in several senses. We had many Robert E. Levinson discussions in the course of the research and writing in which we Associate Professor of History shared criticisms, ideas and concepts, sources (and blind alleys). Director of the Sourisseau Academy and - not least - real pleasure and enthusiasm. The cooperation of others made the outcome possible. We wish especially t o thank the follOWing : Eugene Gilbert, a volunteer worker at the San Jose Historical Museum; Dennis R. Peterson, the former Curator, John B. Dowty , the fooner Director, and Donald DeMers , the current Director of the San Jose Historical Museum, who has been helpful in providing materials for use in the fmal preparation of this volume; Rita Bottoms, Director of Special Collections at the University of California, Santa Cruz, Library ; Samuel Leask Ill; Gordon Sinclair, Managing Editor of the Santa Cruz Sentinel; Mrs. A Mellon, City Clerk of Santa Cruz, and her staff; the Director and other members of the Sourisseau Academy for much help and forbearance; and Nancy Favier, Designer, and Doris Gilbert, Artist,

,San Jose State University Publications, for unusual dedication to ·1 their craft. David W. Eakins

All photographs courtesy of the San Jose Historical Museum. ~Copyright 1976/ Sourisseau Academy for California State and Local History/San Jose State University /San Jose, CA 95192

'.

Introduction By David W Eakins 2 The DiscO\eryof Corruptim as a Public Issue: The Good Government League and the Machine in SanJose . 1896-1902 By John Herberich am Patricia K Cannon 4 The W>rswick Reformers and "The Push;' 1902-1904 By Richard C Wclkefield 8 Centralization and Efficiepcy: 'The Reformers Shape Mx.iern San Jose Government, 1910-1916 By Valeria Ell~th and And-rew1 Grubely 12 The Te~rate Progressives ofSanta Cruz, 1906-1916 By PhilipWright and .Jon Gundersgaad -18 fuotnotes. 20 The Authors 22 WEaki~~ction , ~ David . ns

Beginning in the I890s many American communities suddcnly outrage was a product of a new morality is a circular argument that awoke to the evils of "bossism" and corruption in municipal is obviously true, but unhelpful. It sheds no light on the causes of government. This was a national phenomenon that affccted San the new attitudes. Without disputing the plain fact o f the new Jose and Santa Cruz no less than many other towns across the morality and its significance we must look first at the changj ng country. The cvils thcmselves were nothing new on the American nature of the American city on the national scene as a whole; at urban scene, but they were now, for some reason, intolerable 1.0 the new demands for municipal services; and then we must ask w11Y II growing numbers of local leading citizens. the old politics inhibited-most of all for businessmen-the fu ll As historian Samuel Hays and othcrs have noted, it is not realization of economic benHits from those innovations. sufficient to view municipal reform simply as a battle between the In the l890s a ncw technology was developed in the United forces of "honesty" and "corruption" even though that is the way Stat~s that provided the basis for new national economic growth. reformers described the events themselves. What distinguishcd the That techn ology-in particular, electricity and the au tomobHe­ emerging Progressives from the old guard machIne politicians was changed the face of urban America. The new inventions rapidly - not idealism as opposed to purchaseable pragmatism. The reform­ became central to American economic and social life. Electric ers, too, could make deals with the bosses. What was new in many lights, appliances, telephones, streetcars, and motor vehicles "':. American towns were new economic forces, and a new set of ideas brought jobs and profits for city dwellers, but it was up to city in response to those forces, that rendered what once had been government to provide most of the means by which those inven­ acceptable political practice now insupportable. Corruption had tions could be utilized. It was the responsibility of city politicians become too expensive. None of this is to say that the rhetoric of to provide paved and lighted streets for the automobile, and track s idealism and civic morali.ty was insincere, nor even that it was not and right-of-way and electricity for the "street railways.:' More­ deeply believed by the reformers. But to understand what moved over, the new technology did not creep into the American town; it these people it is necessary to go beyond their own evaluation of came in a rush. For example, the plant and equipment value of the themselves and their works. In other words, what did they do? electrical light and power industry in the United States was $96 Who were they? What specific practices did they, in fact; elimin­ million in 1895. It doubled in value about every five years there­ ate? What positive changes did they introduce'! What concrete after. By 1917 the industry was valued at over two billion dollars. benefits rcsulted from their positive rerorms? Who benefitted? and The street and electric railways grew at a similarly impressive. pace, who opposed the reforms? Some of these are difficult questions. In with a plant and equipment value of $430 million in 1895 and $2.6 applying them to events in San Jose and Santa Cruz thc authors of billion in 1917. The value of electric household appliances and the essays in this volume have not always provided complete supplies was about $2.4 million in 1900 and nearly $59 million in answers. But dcspite the limitations of time and research materials 1917. The most spectacular growth, however, was in the auto­ a number o f conclusions can safely be drawn. motive industry. In 1900 there were eight thousand motor vehicles The usual pattern of municipal reform elscwhere in the United registered in the United States; in 1910, nearly half a million; and States was reproduced in San Jose and, in part, in Santa Cruz. City by 1917 over five million. In 1890 the outstanding highway debt government was centralized. Local ward representation was of all the states was only $11,000. By 1917 it stood at $ 15 4 replaced by the city-wide election of councilmcn. The powers of million. But despite this growing state responsibility, it was the the elected mayor were increasingly whittled away, and then virtu­ American towns and cities that financed most of the new paved ally eliminated with the provision for the appointment of an urban roads. At the close of the Progressive Era American municipalities efficiency expert-the city manager. Thus, not only was direct were s~ending about a third of a billion dollars a year for city local democracy diminished by the removal of ward autonomy, but streets. the major city policy maker was placcd beyond thc reach of city The demands of the new technology upon city government in votcrs. To be sure, the reformers introduced somc of the Progres­ the Progressive Era were enormous-assuming, that is, that local sive Era mechanisms of "direct democracy" in the initiative, refer­ politicians desired that technology for their communities. The point endum, and recall. But these measures were minor appendages to a is, however, they really had little choice-not even in those Ameri­ larger dcsign. They secm to have been added for the sake of gaining can towns like San Jose whose basic wealth was derived at l.east voter consent to a system of centralized control. In San Jose, for indirectly from agriculture. American cities and towns could not, example, the city manager wlw was the most powcrful city official, even had they wished to do so, opt out of a capitalist political was carcfully cxcluded from recall by the voters. economy. Commerce and industry provided an increasing percent­ The reformers came from a narrow spectrum of the population. age of America's jobs and incomes and tax rcvenues. Thus the In San Jose and Santa Cruz they were almost exclusively leading centrality of the urban businessman in the economic hence the membcrs of the business community. Later, in San Jose, some political life of American towns. But the businessman was central women were involved, but the reform movement was initiated and to the urban political economy in another way that compelled carried forward, for the most part, by younger, up-coming busi­ many businessmen to become reformers. American capitalism not nessmen. Nearly all were Republicans. Democrats had little part in only depended on commerce and industry for most jobs and II thc strugglc. The main contest was between machine RepUblicans wealth, but it also dcpended upon the creation and widespread and reform RepUblicans. Thc leading reform organizations were adoption of new technology for the continued . health of that also composed of businessmen. San Jose's turn-of-the-century commerce and ind ustry. It was the businessman in particular who Good Government League, for example, consisted of a highly was t.he most driven by the anticipated rewards of new techrKllogy. disciplined group of businessmen and "orchardists." It was led by And businessmen demanded that American towns make use of that two men who functioned in both occupations and· who soon technology. Without it, local business would stagnate in the face of acquircd the two major newspapers in town. A decade later it was the acceptance of progress elsewhere. And such a state of affairs thc Chamber of Commerce that became an important initiator of was simply inconceivable. reform. City governments everywhere responded to the needs of leading Why did some of the biggest busillessmell become refonuers? citizens. But to do so, governments had, first of all, to find new After all, as Lincoln Steffens charged in his angry book, The Shame sources of revenue to build the unprecedentedly expensive new oj" the Cities, in 1904, it was the dominance of business values in facilities. The tax rate for individual taxpayers could be-and American political life that was re.sponsiblc for the corruption of was-raised. But a far more palata~le course was to increase the city politics. Bribery and graft were business expenses willingly overall tax base, which could be accomplished merely by annexing paid for business contro'l of politics. "The typical businessman," outlying populated areas to thc central community, or, with more Steffens asserted, "is a bad citizen.,,1 If so, why was the reform of difficulty, by attracting new resjdent"s and new business to town. city politics in so many cities led by those same businessmen? Why, Another means of finding ncw funds was to demand an end to the specifically, did San Jose reformers become openly outraged by thc inefficient spending of existing city governments. The i"ntensifying very corruption they had once learned to live with? To say that the demands upon local governments made by their leading citizens 2 brought efficiency into the forefront of Progressive reform ideas. created in the Bay Area hy the opening of the Panama Canal. Political corruption had always been inefficient and wasteful of Despite some advances, the pressure for municipal "progress" resOu rces. But machine governments existed by virtue of their was unrelenting throughout the Progressive Era in San Jose. The ability to respond to special interests. The cost of bribery was an reformers were justified in their repeated claims that San Jose was extra burden o n all taxpayers. But if particular businessmen could not so appealing, to newcomers as were other parts of the state. The receive benefits from the machine, or if other local citizens national popula tion grew about 60 percent between 1890 and retained a significant, although lesser, voice through the power of 1920, but California nearly tripled its population. The most drama­ their votes in t he wards, then the pri ce of ineffi ciency could he tic growth came aft er the turn of the century, especially in the b orne. tn fact, as many recent historia ns have commented, the city second deca de. But San Jose could no t match that rate of in crease. boss or the political machine allowed for a real-if rough and Wh ile its population did nearly double between 1896 and 1920 skewed- sort of direct democracy. And the demands, at least of much of [hal increase (and precisely in the second decade) came businessmen , were not so much fo r mu nicipal services as they were [rom the annexation of alre ad y popula ted areas. 3 for a kind of lais$ez·[aire protection or, more positively, fo r access If San Jose did not fa re so well comparatively. lhe lea ders of its to special OPPoTt umty. Bu t demands for a ne w degree and new municipal refom] movement claimed other successes. By 19 16 San kinds of city services rendered the inefficiency of old-style bossism Jose municipal government was made efficient acco rd ing to the too much to bear. lL was o ne thing to extend expensive favors to reform standard of t he time. T hat is. city government wa special interests but when tax mo ney was spent for streets that modelled o n t he lines of business effi ciency. T he social costs of omehow never received surfacing (and thus could not weU accom­ thaI change, however, were no t fu ll y apparent at the time, not even modate automobiles) or for streetcar tracks that did no t go down­ to the oppo nents of reform. Nearly everyone a'ccepted the model taWIl, or for electrical facilities that were impd'ssib)y expensive of business-like efficiency bec;J use nearly everyone assu med that then that was quite something else in an age when such that notion had to do merely with the form or mode of governing. improvements were crucial to economic li fe itself. Corruption, But such was never tile casco The concept embodied a q ualitative both in politics ami morals, became much too expensive when it ,change in the very nature of government; that is in its very ends prevented economic expansio n in general and caused people and and pu rp oses. An analogy often used by reformers in San Jose and commerce to locate elsewhere. The achievement of efficiency, elsewhere was that the " urban cor,poration" was directed by then. came to be bo th the central tactic and ideology of a move­ experts in the same manner as a busi ness corporation was adminis­ ment for reform in city government that was led by a group of tered by its board of directors. But, then as now, the example newly angry and r ighteous businessmen. connotes more than techniq ue. Efficiency, hoth in theory and The authors of this study demonstrate that San Jose was no especially in practice, meant heeding some citizens and not others. ception to the.. foregoin g generalizations about the national The reformers believed- to continue their own analogy-that the scene. (Santa Cruz has a somewhat differen t, but no less illumin­ customers of the corporation weJe not experts and their partici­ ating, history.) The concerns of San Jose reformers from 1896 to pation in the making of corporation policy must, in the name of f916 were centered. again and again, on the failure to attract new efficiency, be limited. T he average voter was the " shareholder" in commerce; on the growth-inhibiting tax levels; on the fa ilure to the urban corporation who allowed the experts, that is, the city­ encourage new construction; on the lack of roads and efficient rail manager '·president" with the help of the city council "board of service; on the stultifying cost of corruption and inefficiency in directors," to make aU corporate decisions in his name and wilhout every basic municipal service. his wasteful intervention. I n the name of efficiency thl' cit izens of T he leaders of reform in San Jose also worried that their town San Jose were detached from their former relationship to the would fu ll behind the rest of the state in seizing new opportunities making of city political decisions. Which is to sa y that reform in that seemed to be coming uniquely to Californians. People were San Jose resu lted in greater efficiency, supposedly, but the cost of moving to California in increasing n ~rn bers in the Progressive Era. greater efficicncy was Jess democracy. Neither the average citizen San Jose leaders hoped to share in the growth. They particularly nor the authors of municipal reform in San Jose were aware that anticipated the Pacific Basin trade opportunities that would be they were choosing onc in preference to the other.

San Jose Mercury, April 30, 1902, Page One

-~

~,-'- '.'.­,.­ -=­ -!.~~ -::=;-3='" - ~ 1-"~----. - - . . ~ --=-----= " .-~ t -­- ' ' -­ -~ ,-..r .. ,.

HAND OF DECENCY FORCES "JOHNNY" TO HIS DOOM.

3 The Discovery of CorruPtion as a Public Issue: .TheGood Government League and the Machine in San Jose 1896-1902 John Herberich and Patricia K Cannon DEFEAT BOSS IS ASSURED --.-~ OF .THE ~ :_.II! _~ . -- I --- -- •••••• •• ,. •.••••• ...~t Meeting at the Auditorium Last Evening~Hundreds W.ere Turned 8Y- From the Door.

San Jose Herald, May 17, 1902, Page Two T he refo rm of San Jose's political structure began in 1896 when John D. Mackenzie, who "formed the strongest political machine it was an agricultural community of 21,000 peo ple. The reform in the history of San Jose."s James W. Rea was a successful activities of some San Jose citizens in the last decade of the nine­ attorney and wealthy businessman and the recognized " county teenth century were repeated in other municipalities across the boss for the Southern Pacific machine.,,6 Harry J. Edwards was country. That activity represents a prelude to the period of Ameri­ manager of the Electric Improvement Company, a subsidiary of the can history known as the Progressive Era. San Francisco Power and Light Company. Mackenzie, a profes­ Beginning with a new city charter in 1897, the citizens of San sional politician under the old regime was a natural successor to Jose, led by members of the business and professional community, Rea. Their base of operation was the California Club and their challenged the entrenched political "machine" represented by voice was the San Jose Evening News. 7 • ward, city, and county "bossism." Their methods included innova­ According to a 1908 article in the San Jose lHercury, reviewing tive political reform, ;<;g:> I action, and yellow journalism tactics the earlier history of San Jose, the "machine" sustained itself which explored new depths of character assassination and sensa­ through "large contracts . .. let out to the favored patrons of the tionalism. I 'machine'. . . . Gamblers and sal oonkeepers were subjected to The reformers attacked both the "machine" and its corrupt monthly 'graft' and school teachers were compelled at the risk of practices. In the newspapers that they purchased to advance their their positions to deal in 'machine' stores.,,8 Firemen, policemen cause, they repeatedly asserted that San Jose had stagnated in a and other politically appointed office holders were subject to cesspool of corruption which repulsed any outside investment in kickbacks collected by the "heelers" of the "ring." The "ring" the growth and development of the city.2 At the same time they maintained its political power through threats of boycott, public argued that the costs of operating and maintaining municipal slander and control of the election process.9 services had risen to an outrageous degree. Municipal taxation, therefore, became a central issue. Waste and corruption slowed down or prevented the construction of new paved roads, electrical II. REPUBLICANISM AND THE REFORMERS lines, street lighting, the extension of streetcar services and The main opposition to the entrenched Republican leadership at improved. sewage systems. All of these additional and extended the turn of the century came from within the Republican party. services created the necessity for efficiency in govern ment and The Good, Government League, later 'renamed the RepUblican fiscal responsibility. Good Guvernment League, and the municipal parties that it sup­ Within four years after its conception, an organization com­ ported were composed primarily of businessmen who formed a prised of an elite group of business-oriented reformers had success­ splinter group within the party and challenged the established local full y marched the county "machine" to the wall and placed the Republican leadership. There was " a strong feeling that a rough overwhelming majority of its reform candidates in city office. element has control of the Republican party and that a reform is much needed."· 0 I. REPUBLICANISM AND THE "GANG" The Good Government League ledgers reflect a league member­ The Republican Party had long dominated Santa Clara County ship with a very strong upper-middle class business interest. The politics and it in turn was dominated by the "Southern Pacific organization was composed of doctors, attorneys, judges, occasion­ Political Bureau.,,3 According to George Mowry, the power of the ally a professor, but mostly successful merchants., other business­ Southern Pacific, "was evident in almost every party convention men, and orchardists.·· The secret pledge of mem bership into the during the period and in practically every election. ,,4 League was the oath of a business alliance morally outraged and Political bossism in San Jose during this period was divided monetarily handicapped by the tight control of the Republican between the "Rea-Edwards gas house gang" and their successor, machine on business in the Santa Clara Valley. 4 I desire to become a member of the Good Government community representation.,,19 The mayor was to be virtually League of Santa Clara Valley. s~ripped of his appoin tive powers. The new charter specified that I am a Republican. an Appointing Board be elected at large for the pur pose of appoint­ In the event of my election as a member of said League I pledge ing officers such as the Fire and Police Commission and the Board myself to advance by every honorable means to secure the of Education. Each Board, after these initial appointments, would nomination and election to offi ce of pure, honest and fea rless e renewed by appointments of the mayor, but in accordance with men; to do all in my power to overthrow and defea t political a system of staggered retirement so that no single administration bossell and ri ngs, their tools and creatures. especially the ring at could seriously affect its personality.20 present co ntr~lling the offices and patronage of Santa Clara The Charter, "framed by taxpayers, provided for a careful County. . ..1 guarding of the city treasury with a view to an administration of However, just as the leaders of the "gang" Republicans dis­ the public business at the lowest expense to the taxpayer.,,21 It covered that the ·combination of political control and business was contained a provision to allow for the removal of tax assessment not only compatible, but higbly profitable, so did the "reform" and collection from the local to the county level and Ii "cash basis Republicans cultivate their business ideology of politics for per­ fund" to ensure that the payment for the running ex penses of the sonal gain. city government be on a cash basis making each administration The most influential fig ures of the "reform" RepUblicans were responsible for its own expenses. No burden of debt could be left the Hayes brothers, Evens Anson Hayes and Jay Orlo Hayes. The to a later administration. The Charter also fixed. the lintit of two men moved to San Jose In 1887 and ten years later emerged as taxation. It was not to exceed one dollar upon each one-hundred the leaders of the Good Government League of Sa nta Clara dollar evaluation of property assessed. County. Both E. A. Hayes and J. o. Hayes had si milar back­ The limitation of mayoral powers indicated a strong distrust of grounds. Both ha d degrees fro m the University of Wisconsi n, were the office, which is to say, a distrust of the fo rmer mayor practicing lawyers, and had substantial wealth accumulated from themselves. In years to come the power of the mayor was weak­ their iron mines in Michigan. Once in San Jose they purchased a ened still more, leading to the almost to tal elimination of the ranch home and fruit enterprise and through their positions in the authority of the office in the reform charter of 1916. The new tax California Prune and Apricot Growers Associatio n eventually assessment and collectio n feature in the.J 897 charter served as the moved into local poutics. After the formation of the Good Govern­ first indication of taxpayer skepticism over the previous method. ment League, E. A. Hayes retained the office of presidency Sanford E. Smith, president of the New Charter Club, expressed throughout the Ufe of the organization, while J. o. Hayes remained that distrust, for example, when he filed suit to force the hesitant on the Board of Trustees. council to pass an ordinance to " properly provide for the collec­ By 190I the Hayes brothers Ilad purc hased the Herald and the tion of taxes for the city by the county tax collector. .. 11 Mercury. The combined in fluence of the League and the ownership I of the t wo maj or newspapers in San Jose proved enormously &111 Jose Mercury, April 27 , 1902, Page One I effective in atlaining political goals and success fo r the Hayes brothers, as well as for the League. As E . A. Hayes himself stated, I they "were in the newspaper business to help carry out the objects YOUNG MEN RALLY AROUND I of the League and they were going to do it to the best of their ability .''' 3 STANDARD OF WORSWICK By 1905 (the same year 1hat the Good Government League I dissolved) E. A. Hayes had been elected to Congress where he served for fourteen years while J., O. Hayes ran the two newspapers until his death in 1948. J. O. remained active in California politics as a delega te to the state Republican conventi on. He was also an active member of the San Jose Chamber of Commerce, the Com­ mercial Club, and various civic groups. 1 4 The political success of th e Hayes brothers demo nstrated the ideology of the Good Government League: To replace "gang" p o litician~ with " responsible" citizens. In 190 I the League was frequently in touch with state Republican reform leaders in Sacra­ mento and seriously· considered organizing a League branch in every county of California. Although this did not become a reality, the Good Government League did maintain an active lobby in the state capital. 1 S In. INSTRUMENTS OF REFORM The origins of·the progressive movement in San Jose reach back to the creation of a new city charter in 18 96 by a board o f 15 Freeholders. Whil e the charter was approved by over 60% of those voting on November. 1897, this represented the opinion of onJy one-seventh of the population. 16 But the charter became the vehlcle for the reform movement, whose vanguard was the New Charter Club, an organization composed of the original 15 Free­ holders. These men voted to re m:un an active body ·'to unite in ne organization those who desire to secure good government in the city of San lose by substituting correct business principles in the management of public affairs in the place o f the present orrupt and wasteful system."] 7 The New Charter Club together with the newly formed Good Government League of Santa Clara County, vociferously chall enged the corruptness of l·he city admin­ IstTation and its methods, and proposed to replace both bad men and bad metl10ds with " good government, runlmore effectively like a business. ,,] 0 The maJor new innovations in the city charter included two baSIC changes in the municipal government: Legislative organi­ zation designed to end c' one man rule" and a new system of fllnding the apministralion. All councilmen were eJected by their individual wards under the old system. The new charter, however, provided for the four ward council men and a new "at large" position to be voted on by the entire body of the electorate. This fea ture le nt itself to a "fuller expression of public opinion in the case of ea<:h candidate for council," thus allowing "for greater s IV. 1898: LESSONS WELL LEARNED In the meantime, the Good Government League instigated O n April I I, 1898, the first election u ndeT the new charter was investigat ions and conseq uently court sui.ts against the il legal poll­ held. The issues w,ere clear to the refonners: should Sa n Jose ing procedures currently practiced in the county. 29 Heavily publi­ remain under the power of the " gang of politicians" or implement cizing the corrupt gang polling tactics used in the municipal elec­ t he progressive ideals of the new'Charter under "responsible" local tion of 1898, the Good Government t.eague won its first substan­ leadership. This municipal election was the initial challenge to the tial victory in the coun ty election in November. 3 o. On a "old guard" itself: vict ory would mean a continuation of the Dem ocratic-Republican " fusion ticket" eight League support ed public mandate given in the passage of th e new charter. The New candidates secured eight of the sixteen county offi ces including Charter Club, backed by the 'Good Government League, openly Supreme Court Judge, District Attorney and the office of tax accused the former ad ministrat.ion of graft, theft , corruption and collector. Such old line Re publicans as Representative E . F. Loud mismanagement in San J ose. The rhetoric that ensued ren ected a and State Senator Charles M. Shortridge were returned to office in clear cut struggle between municipal co.ntrol by city boss or "gang" the overwhelming state R epublican landslide. And " Boss" J. W. control versus efficien t business-like municipal management. Rea was also reinstated as County Supervisor, h owever with such a Mayor Val Kock (ironically one of the 15 r eforming Free­ slim margin that even the Herald (which supported h im ) com­ 3 1 holders) and the majority of th e incumbents did not run. Three mented upon his loss of popular support. T he Good Govemmcnt tickets were offered to the citizens of San Jose: The Peo ple's League had clearly su cceeded in opening up the county to " good Municipal Ticket, the New Charter Club and the Independent government." It would continue to focus on a county-state level, CITY OF. SAN.. JOSE I __ , San Jose Mercllry, May 20, 1902, Page One Party. The race was most clearly polarized between the People's abstaining from the support of a municipal tick et in 1900. Municipal Ticket ·and the New Charter Club. Charles 1. Martin, a T he city of San Jose was served by three major newspa.pers. TIle previous councilman and mayor led the People's Ticket which Evening News had long been an established Republican newspaper included J. N. Ewing, the City Treasurer since 1894, and J. W. supporting the "gang" ticket in earlier county and local elections Cook, Clerk from the previous administration. These three experi­ and espousing strong anti-Hayes and anti-" Goo Goo" sentimen t enced . politicians plus the party's endorsement by the Evening throughout the early I 900s. Until 1899, th.e Herald was the only INews and the Mercury indicated affiliation with the pre-charter Democratic daily newspap er published between San Francisco and administration and its ideals. Los Angeles. It was purchased in Septembet , 1899, by Republican The New Charter Club ran its president, Sanford E. Smith, for State Senator Shortridge and not surprisingly began supporting mayor along with four businessmen and a teacher, all political "gang" Republicanism until it drifted into credi tor receivership in neophytes. Only their candidate for Councilman at Large, 1. P. August, 1900. On January 9, 190I it was officially announced that Jarman·, had previous political experience. He had been a council­ the Herald had passed into the hands of new owners, t he Hayes man of the Fourth Ward and was, at this time,'a member of the brothers.32 Although J. O. Hayes, the President and General Good Government League. Manager of the Herald Publishing Company initially denied that Lacking the direct backing of a newspaper, the Good Govern­ the paper would become a mouthpiece for the Good Government ment League published pamphlets in support of the New Charter Leap- .... e, the official policy statement in the paper contained som6 Club candidates which elucidated the issues. "San Jose," one familiar Good Government League rhetoric: leaflet proclaimed, in an address to the taxpayer, "is the worst More than anything else its theme will be to assist in all legit i­ I taxed town (per capita) of its size in the United States.,,23 Exten­ mate ways to building up the city of San Jose and Santa sive tables· compared San Jose with numerous other communities Clara County and it will be interested in fld will support of similar size across the United States. San Jose taxes were spent every effort to promote their prosperity. 3 without reference to the public good or necessities and were designed rather to "feed the San Jose gang of politicians." The The other major San Jose newspaper and the only morning leaflet concluded, "we have simply been systematically robbed."24 daily, the lVfercury, maintained a neutral, if slightly Republican A scathing anonymous letter to the editor of the Herald made the position, until it too was purchased by the Hayes brothers in 190 I. accusation that political appointees returncd as much as one-half of On November I, 1903, the two pUblications were combined as the t heir salaries to their "official creators." This in effect answered San Jose Mercury-Herald. Once in possession of these newspapers, the question: "How else can men afford to pay $500 to $1,000 to the Good Government League was ready to launch an all out be elected to a position to which there is no salary and to which no attack against the city machine of San Jose. From the date of their lawful fees are attached.,,2 S purchase by the Hayes brothers, both newspapers pursued a one­ Wielding their pamphlets against the three majorSan Jose news­ sided campaign with pointed omissions of references to other than papers, the Good Government League advised the citizens to vote Good Government League supported candidates or issues. the entire Charter Club ticket, "thus redeeming our fair city from V. 1902: VICTORY boss and gang and striking such a blow at corru~t government as will encourage the friends of reform everywhere." 6 In a presidential speech given in December, 1898, E. A. Hayes The People's Municipal Ticket was elected in 1898 despite the discussed the objectives and accomplishments of the Good Govern­ Good Government League's evaluation of its virtues and political ment League. In less than a year the League had risen from an connections. Having lost the municipal elections, the Good Govern­ initial membership of 39 to over 200 middle to upper class busi­ ment League directed its focus to the county elections, and con­ nessmen, all carefully screened for their integrity prior to accep­ centrated on the primary causes of their failure to wrest the city tance. Reviewing their first year in operation, Hayes pointed out from the dutch of the gang: The lack of press coverage and corrupt that the League had eliminated corrupt polling procedures, peti­ polling methods. tioned Sacramento to change the status of city and county offices, The League attacks apparently induced the new council to enlightened the voter to the "gang" connection of current Republi­ mitiate several reform measures of its own. There was an attemp~ can leaders, and won considerable offices in the county elections. by the "gang" to reverse the newly established tax assessment and Hayes then drew the future plans: To carry through the prose­ collection procedures in November, 1898. Reporting that "some cutions of the election fraud trials, focus attention on the city and members of the council are the gang's most obedient servants," the county officials and the expenditure of public funds, and support a Herald, a Democratic anti-"gang," anti-Republican newspaper at primary election law. this time, expressed the fear that the council would attempt to In the November 6, 1900, county elections, the Good Govern­ return tax assessment to local control. But with the support of the ment League supported an impressive number of victorious candi­ new mayor and two members of the council, this attempt was dates; League members being elected to the 54th and 56th unsuccessful.2 7 The council also fired several notorious poli tical Assembly districts. appointees of the previous administration and reduced the salaries Although leeway had been made in San Jose, the League did not of three high school teachers, whose appointments were of an support a municipal ticket until 1902. With the Herald and apparent political nature, from $140 to $ 75 a month as an induce­ 1l;!erCUry under reform ownership, the Independence Club candi­ 28 date for mayor, George D. Wotswick, was sw'ept to victory on the ment to quit. 6 loudly re-emphasized anti-gang rhetoric of 1898. Worswick and the ported and won elections with tickets composed of local citizens entire ticket supported by the Good Government League, with the unmarred by previous political experi ence. As a result of pressure exception of City Treasurer, replaced the gang-tool regime; cl~a rly from the Leagu"e, fo rmer mayor-appointed offices were changed to a San Jose " progressive" victory. county j urisdiction and county primaries were enacted. Worswick was subsequently re-electcd in 1904 and t he League" The extent of the influence of t he Southern Pacific on San Jose was further victorious in county elections, an d fi nally elected E. A. p o liti~s at the turn of t1le century has not been sufficiently docu­ Hayes to the United States Congress in 1905. mented. I t is strongly suspected that it provided the primary source VI. EV ALUAnON of power behind the RepUblican "machine" which dominated San Jose politiGs. As an agricultural com munity dependent on the Although the changes in the 1897 charter were immediately railroads for transportation of its prod uce to aid market, t he inlpli­ effective at weakening the power and influence o f Ule established cations are obvious. Republican poli tical structure, many of the reforms themselves A city management subservierrt to a state pol.tical system and were in fact restrictive. As an example, the initial "councilman at occupied with thoughts of personal gain does not keep adequate large" positiQll created in the 189 7 charter was the first step at pace with the rapid development of the Bay Area. Frustrated by eliminating Ule more democratic ward system- sacrificeing ward this lack of attention to urban growth and expansion necessary for autonomy for municipal unity. Restricting the appointive powers the development of the business co mmunity, those most direclly of the mayor was the first step toward the elimination of the affected sought to replace the prevailing politic.aJ system with one authority of tbat position and· the eventual consolidation of city o f their own. Thus t he pri mary goal was to open the ci ty up to the govern ment in the hands of a city manager. growth and commerce U13t the Santa Clara Vallcy had to offer. However, t be new charler was a popular reform in that it did Although no statistical evidence exists to determine how the e COD ­ reduce the level of corruption in San Jose. F urthermore it was omy of San Jose was a.ffected by the entrance of the early progres­ popular by virtue of its instigatio n and backing by the taxpayers of sives into office, the poli tical success of Ule businessmen in the the city. That the new charter would benefit the taxpaying citizen form of the Good Gove rnment League is indicated in a concluding and businessman was ensured by the tax li mit o n property and the remark made by a committee to study the reorganization of the cash fund measure. League in 1903: T he Good Government League was an innovative political instrument of the reform movement. It was the first political group in Sa nLa Clara County to rise in stature and influence enough to The present city administration and county Republican successfully challenge the Republican Southern Paci fi c authority organiza~on are now in the hands 01' our members and on city, county and state levels fo r eight years. The League sup­ friends. 3

.. TheWorswick Reformers and \\The Push;' 1902-1904 Richard CWakefield A prosperous community in the Progressive Era was one that elected. The Worswick people were no more charitable about attracted both people and capital. Accordmg to the new business­ 'Mackenzie and his band of "heelers, vagrants, and burns." led reform movement, San Jose was accomplishing neither one o f those objectives. During the 1902 and 1904 city electio n cam­ "THE PUSH" paigns the reformer-owned Mercury asked some leading ci tizens for John D. Mackenzie and his brother, Andrew, owned the San tbe reasons why. People would neither settle nor invest their Jose Foundry. Adolph Greeninger, who had been a resident of San money in San Jose, responded F. C. Ensign, a former real estat Jose since 1865, was the owner of the Globe Carriage Factory, dealer, because they were afraid "to take their chances in a place which he helped establish along with his brother. He had been a where government was notoriously bad. Every taxpayer fears bad member of tht: collDty board of supervisors and as early as 1873, local government. Capital IS timid."· A physician from Springfield, he had been elected a city councilman. His popularity, however, Massachusetts who was worth $1 50,000 was interested in con1!ng had waned in the years before the 1902 election. In 1896 he ran to San lose. But Ule Mercury reported that after inquiring of a for assessor and was defeated by five hundred votes. friend about property taxt:s and the type of government in San In an appar!'nt effort to confuse the voters about which candi­ Jose, he ,d ecided against moving there. 2 These examples dramatize date was on wltich slate, Mackenzie and his followers returned to what reformers saw as an important consequence of machine thtl "Peoples' Municipal Ticket" label that they had used in 1898. control in San Jose. But in contrast to the plebian party na me, "tl1e push" had damty On April 2, J902, a mass convention of citizens met in Tum cards printed up and distributed to the voterS' much in the manner that (in the words of the pro-reform Mercury) "3 caller at a Fifth Verein Hall, to nominate a municipal opposition ticket against the 4 "boss rule" candidates of the city. S. G. TompkinS, selected as avenue mansion" might. Secretary fo r the Citizens' Committee, voiced the feelings of the In order to ensure that the city's ejection officers would be entire group when he asked: friends of " the push," Mackenzie and his mayor placed 58 people in these positions. Many of the new officers were ineligible because Must we govern under a system of the boss, for the boss, and they did Dot reside in the precinct where they were to be election by the boss, must we be competing as to who is lhe lowest offic~rs. Evans De nt, for example, a lieutenant in the Mackenzie dog. so to speak, or is lhis convention to develop its own J machine, was appointed ballot clerk in the Fifth precinct. But Dent antidote for such disease. . resided in the Fourth precinct. Of the remaining 62 names on the At this convention, George D. Worswick was.selected the candidate list of election officers, many were ineligible because they held s for mayor to head the Citizens' Mun icipal Ticket for honest another public office. The " push" candidate for councilman from govern ment. He was to receive vigorous support from the two [hI.! Fourth Ward was not even a resident of San Jose. W. H. reform newspapers, the San Jose Mercury and the San Jose Herald. Anderson did re nt an apartment at 14 1 S. First Street, but he lived The convention began a bitter fight which ended in the election of at No. 2 Whi te Street, which was not in the city limits. The city 6 Worswick and in a victory for the Good Government League directory also listed his residence at the White Street address. • forces. To give " the push" much needed' support and possibly to help "The push," the name given to the "boss" and his foll owers by keep San Jose in the hands of poli ticians friendly to Governor the Mercury , was headed by John D. Mackenzie. Adolph Green­ Henry T. Gage, four hundred election workers were im ported trom inger was Mackenzie's candidate for mayor. They would pull out San Francisco. Gage was the governor of California [rom 1898­ every stop in political corruption to try and get their candidate 1902 and was controlled by the Southern Pacific forces. The San

Th is essay is dedicated to the memory of Barbara Jeall WakeJield, 8 Sa n Jose Herald, May 10, 1902, Page One

Fra ncisco helpers were, according to the San Francisco Call, under After John Mackenzie's defeat Jesse Marks commented: "Whenever 'I the direction of Jesse Marks, ex-boss of the Fortieth Assembly a town is big enough to hav e labor unions, Mayor Schmitz has the district. 7 They were to do anything to help the Ma ckenzie machine influence. Schmitz is the cause of Johnny's defeat." 15 stay in office. James W. "Jim" Rea, former boss in San Jose in the late 18905 Finally , "the push," in a desperate attempt to defeat Worswick, became a supporter of Worswick in the 1902 election. In March, charged him with corruption. In a speech at Schuetzen Park, the S31lta Clara County Republican League met to elect represen­ mayoral candidate Greeninger produced checks purported to have tatiVes to the state convention. In an effort to take over complete been signed by Worswick and paid to members of the Grand Army control of the County League, Mackenzie pushed for the ouster of of the Republic to buy their votes. In a sworn statement, Worswick the league president so that his own man, Louis Oneal, would be said that he did not have an account at the James A. Costa Bank, elected in his place. Rea stood up to oppose Mackenzie's move but where the checks had been drawn. He also stated that he had not the "vagrants, heelers, and bums," that Mackenzie 'packed into the and would not buy anyone's vote.8 meeting finally shouted him down. Mackenzie took control of the 16 WORSWICK AND GOOD GOVERNMENT League. It was at that point that Rea became a supporter of Worswick and good government. Wi th Rea's help, a portion of "the George _D. WQf.swick proved to be a strong candidate for mayor. push" vote was secured fOJ the reform platform.17 After the He had a reputat ion for honesty and he was an eloquent speaker. election, Rea was called upon to make a speech to the Indepen­ Worswick spent most of his early years in Ketchum, Idaho, where dence Club at a victory party. He talked about "losing his reputa­ he owned a mercantile business. As a result of his business success, tion" as a "Doss" and went on to say: Worswick was later made a district manager for the Rocky Moun­ tain Bell Telephone Company. The Idaho climate did not agree I believe in the innate goodness of the people, although with a member of Worswick's family so he moved to San Jose in sometimes they get under bad leadership. We must dean out the idea that there is anything in politics. It must be an unsel­ 1890 and went into the fruit business. By 1895, Worswick was the 8 manager of the California Green and Dried Fruit Company. In fish and patriotic spirit that imbues the voters. I 190 I, h~ · resigned that position and took over a similar one with It appears that the Good Government League came to terms the Pine Box Manufacturers Agency. He also was president of the with Southern Pacific during the Worswick election. Nowhere dur­ San Jose Council of the National Union, a fraternal insurance 9 ing the period leading up to the election was there any criticism of order. Worswick had a broad base of support that included much Southern Pacific activities by the Mercury or the Herald, either on of the San Jose labor and business community, and, not least, the the local or on the state scene. Yet throughout the state, the support of the two Hayes papers, the Mercury and the Herald. various reform newspapers were vigorously attacking the Southern Both papers carried endorsements of various citizens for Worswick. Pacific machine. In none or Worswick's speeches was anything said Such enticing slogans as "Worswick is strong because he is ·about Southern Pacific, good or bad. The fact that after a visit to manly,,,10 appeared. These papers also exposed all the corruption San Jose by S. P. President Harriman the local employees of that they found about the Mackenzie machine. Southern Pacific formcd an organization in support of Worswick Worswick received some crucial support from rabor. A. B. would also point to some type of an agreement. Finally, James W. Campbell, the chairman of the reformers' Citizens' Committee, was Rea had been the county boss for the Southern Pacific machine. an officer of the Carpenters' Union. I I John J. Craig, president of 12 His break with Mackenzie and subsequcnt alliance with the the San Jose Typographical Union, endorsed Worswick. An reformers is further evidence of an agreement bj!tween Southern especiaUy unusual action came when the employees of the Pacific and the Good Government League forces. This would Southern Pacific Railroad organized the Railroad Political Club, to appear to indicate that the reformers were not above making deals work in Worswick's behalf. This committee was organized on the with the "bosses" to gain power. same day that E. H. Harriman, president of the Southern Pacific paid a visit to San Jose.1 3 The pro-labor mayor of San Francisco, THE COSTS OF CORRUPTION John Schmitz, spoke to the Stableman's Union on behalf of As was indicated earlier, it was evident that the businessmen Worswick. He expressed his concern for the people of San Jose and behind Worswick were mainly concerned with the lack of econ­ appealed to them to have a labor representative on the citizens' omic growth under the Mackenzie regime. In an editorial in the ticket. 14 The San Francisco mayor's support was clearly helpful. Mercury, one businessman fclt that a Worswick victory would San Jose Herald, May 15, 1902, Page One

9 San Jo se Mercur:y, May 9, 1902, Page One mean five million dollars in new revenue for San Jose. High taxes, Common Coullcil.This would allow the ci ty to meet any emer­ Jack of protection and fear of blackmail were all part of a corrupt gency which might arise and that could not be met by the funds government according to the businessman . This ge ntlema n felt that already appropriated ill that area. This amendment was also in ten­ corrupt poli tics kept people, industrieS and capital out of the Sa n ded as a check against a dishonest increase of surplus money and it J ose area: I 9 would not allow the money to be spent on "wil d schemes" or During the campaign, the Mercury and the leaders of the Citi­ impro per purposes. The amendment was passed by a 60 percent zens' Com mittee cited many examples of corruption under the majority of the vote.23 existing Martin administration wh ich pointed again toward the During Worswick's first two yea-rs in office, real estate prices Mackenzie machine. During "the push" control, the streets deterio­ increased as much as 50 percent. Reformers credited Worswick's rated to a condition worse than that of ten or twelve years earlier. ad mi nistration for the fact that San Jose's population had " T he push" remedied this problem by replacing th e street superin­ increased from 21 ,400 in 1900 to 27,868 by 1904. T his repre­ tendent with not one person, but eight. So instead of paying o ne sented a ~ain of 30 percent-according to the reformer's statistics, man $1 200 a year to keep up the streets, they paid 'e ight men a at least.2 During the period from January I, 1903 to Ma rch 31 , total of $7000 a year.2 0 1904, the Worswick administration secured $563,399 in re.venue C. P. Hall, lessee and manager of the Victory Theater, was from new building permits for t he city treasury. It was estimated blackmailed into giving free tickets to the members of " the push." . that bet ween 500 and 700 new buildings were erecte'd during He and his employees were subjected to petty and unwarranted Worswick's first two years in office. T hese buildings totalled a 2 annoyances and various interferences of busi ness by the police. million and a half dollars worth of construction. 5 When Hall asked what he could do to correct this situation, he was Worswick's administration also accomplished much in the area told by Police and Fire Commissioner W. 1. Osterm(ln that compli­ of street repairs. One hundred and fifty new street crossings had mentary passes to the shows would alleviate the problem. When the been put in by 1904. Forty streets had been repaired and Delmas passes to the shows were issued, the annoyances stopped. Besides Avenue was put under a new covering of gravel. T he city also Osterman, John and ltis brother Andrew Mackenzie al so received purchased a new grader to "crown up" the streets. l6 Under tickets. A total of 36 free passes were iss ued at each show to Worswick, East Santa CLara Street, a real headache fo r the Macken­ members of " the pUSh."l I . zie regime, was repaired at a cost of $7,807 .07. The money to pay T he worst example of corruption exposed by the Mercury had for these street repairs came from " money saved by economy in to do with the taking of. money from firemen to help pay for the other branches of the city government." Mackenzie's people had political campaigns of the Mackenzie candidates. Two fi remen, est imated the cost for re pair of East Santa Clara Street to be William F. Tennant and George Hines, gave sworn testimony to the 17,385.77. It was to be paid by a bond issue, but the bonds were Mercury as to tb e manner hy which this money was ob tained. never voted.27 Street lighting was almost doubled under lhe Wors­ During the city and county elections of 1898 and 1900, the chiefs wick administration. But the yearly cost was still nearly $400 less of the various fire crews demanded a $35 assessment from eaeh than that paid by the Mackenzie machjne. 28 fi reman. The assessment was paid to the California Clu b, a poli tical These first. two years that Wo rswick was in power were uncom­ group headed by Mackenzie. Those who failed to pay the assesso monly free of corruption, although one scandal was uncovered by ment were dropped from the department. During these two elec­ the old machine during the 1904 election campaign. But ironically tions, fireman Tennant"paid fmu assessments ranging from $ 20 to the event involved a former "push" politicIa n. T . J. McGeoghegan. 105 for a total of $ 180 paid to the California Club. This sum 22 the last hold over of the Mackenzie regime, was found to have a represen ted nearly- t wo months salary fo r him. defi cit of $9,823.07 in the city treasury. "The push" tried to use WORSWICK'S ADMINISTRATION tlris as a spring board back into power. The officials representing On May 19, 1902, Worswick was elected mayor of San Jose. t he bonding companies fo r the city were used by Mackenzie in an very member of the Cit izens' Municipal T icket was elected but effort to involve Worswick in the scandal. Mr. Lloyd of the Amer­ one. Only T. 1. McGeoghcgan, the incumbent City T reasurer, was ican Bonding Company refused to pay the who le defi cit and asked retu rned to office. Worswick's first two years in office were pro­ that the mayor make up part of the deficit by usi ng money from d uctive o nes. T here were majo r improvements in street repairs, the campaign commi ttee. Worswick sa w through this " attem pted street lighting, a great increase in new construction and maj or blackmail" and immediately filed suit against t he bonding com­ panies for repayment of the stolen funds. T his killed Mackenzie's charter change. atiempt to regain control, although the machine returned t o power On February 18, 1903, the citizens of San Jose supported one 29 in 1906. , amendment to the city charter. It allowed any money that still remained in the general fund or any specific fund at the end o f the In 1904 . the Mercury interviewed former San J ose husinessman fiscal year to be shifted to any other specific fund that would best . M. Wooster (then in business in San F rancisco) about what serve the public interest as determined by the mayor and the anOU1eJ; Worswick vi ctory would mean to the city. Wooster claimed San Jose Mercury, May 13, 1902, P.lge One

MilIa'

10 Sail Jose Herald, Ma y 15, 1902, Page One that "as a commercial proposItion for San Jose as a corporation, removed from his or her j ob for polit ical reasons al one. To fi re a the fe-election of Mayor Worswick will be worth $500,000 to the teacher under the proposed amend ment, the Board of Trustees had city.,,3 o As long as there was honest government Wooster felt San to show cause; charges had to be fi led and the teacher glven a trial J ose would continue to be a prosperous corporation. The voters in an open court. This amendment would have removed politics seem ed to agree. Compared to 1902, the 1904 election was a low from the schools and would no longer force a teacher to "bu tton key affair. Wo rswick and his entire slate were re-elected. hole" his friends to vote tor the designated candidate in order to keep his position. The amendment was suggested by the te ach~ ONCLUSJO and strongly backed by the mayor and Common Council along Ln terms of the goals set down by the Good Government with the Mercury. But it was defeated by one percen t of the total League, Worswick and his administration proved measurably suc­ vote cast. Many of the peopl e who voted for the finance amend­ cessful They succeeded in at least deCrtlasing corruption in politics ment did no t vote for this one. Other voters felt that a leacher's and brought new economic growth to San Jose. Wo rswick elim i­ position should depend on the character of the Board of Education nated many of the useless offices created by " t he push" and saved and not a change in the wording of the charier. It was UTe opinion the city money in the various areas of the city treasury. In his first of the Mercury t hat the amend ment lost because some teachers year in office the treasury showed a balance of $6,711 .45 in the opposed it and openly campaigned against the amendment.3 2 3 school fund alone. I A number of municipal servi ces were greatly These teachers felt that the amendment would nQ t have im prove d improved. Worswick did much to please the reformers, but no their posi tion and that it was not "advisa ble for the positions of reforms were made iD election mechanics and o nl y one in the city any in tellectuals to be made permanent. ,,3 J government structure itself during Worswick's first two years in But the original image of the reform administration s!J ffered office. Although there was no reduction in the tax rate. there was a from more than t his relatively minor set back at the polls. It tax refund to the people of San lose in 1904 . As a result of til l! appears thaI t he Good Governmen t League people were no t afraid Wo rswick administration's efforts an important anlcndmenl to the to make deals with the "bos~es " to fu rther their own position. city charter was passed in February, 1903 th at allowed a tighter Through the 1904 electio ns t he Mercury still refrained from m ak­ control over city finances. ing an attack on the Southern Pacific machine. Thus, while it seems One attempted reform of the Worswick administration failed. clear that Wo rswick did much to encourage economic growth in One of tile amendments to the cbarter voted on by the citizens of San Jose, fie did not permanently alter either the structure-or, in San lose on February 13, 1903, required that no teacher could be some respects, at least, the morality of city politics. Soli Jose Herald, May 14, 1902, Page One JNSULTING ATT'EM-PT-rO -BRIBE' A WORKINGMAN TO VOTE PUSH TICKET

Sail Jose HeFald, May 17.1902, Page One Centralization and Efficiency: The Reformers Shape Modern

San Jose Government, t' 1910-1916

by Valerie Ellsworth and Andrew 1 Garbely

On July I, 1916, San Jose adopted a new charter that radically i enthusiastic support was given to all reform candidates. This " altered the political machinery of city government. Since the late support continued throughout the 1910, 1912 and 1914 elections. nineties, the 'progressive reformers had attempted to rid San Jose of Besides giving recognition to reform candidates, this newspaper "boss rule." Their efforts resulted in the passing of a charter which " became an important element in the campaign to obtain a new placed local governmental control primarily into the hands of men charter. who directed policy from a purely business orientation. Although By the time of the 1910 election, the reformers had organized earlier officials were also businessmen for the most part, city for the purpose of revamping the charter. Most of these people government, prior to the change, was influenced by more than this were businessmen and members of the upper class in San Jose. The one segment of society. Chamber of Commerce helped to initiate the movement while the Before the change in 1916, four of the five city councilmen, Women's Civic Study League worked for the adoption of the although elected by the city at large, had to reside in their respec­ proposed changes. The Good Government League had drawn tive wards. The major change, however, was the elimination of the largely from the business community for its membership just as mayor by an "expert" in municipal affairs. This official was the these later reformers would do. But unlike the later reformers the city manager who directed most of the affairs of the city and who early reform movement had .not made many concessions to other was not elected by the popUlace. Only the city councilme.n had the groups in a search for broad community support. power to appoint and dismiss him. What had taken place in San The reformers in San Jose claimed that the immediate stimulus Jose, as in numerous other cities in the United States during the for their reform efforts was the corruption in municipal govern­ Progressive Era, was a centralizatibn of power in local government ment. Specifically, they accused two mayors-Davison and that would increase efficiency and eliminate what the reformers Monahan-of bribery in allowing such illegal practices as lotteries referred to as "minority" or "self-interest" rule. These reformers and slotmachines to exist. I The reformers insisted that these and struggled throughout the era to gain local control of government to other vices made San Jose unattractive for future growth. But the implement their plan to organize city government along the same most vehement charge against the "bosses" was that they repre­ lines as a corporation. By managing the city like a corporation, the sented a minority. They represented only corrupt politicians and a reformers felt that local government could operate more efficiently small and selfish electorate. and remain free from "political" interference, to best serve the But the reformers themselves interpreted the needs of the com­ interests of the community as a whole. munity of San Jose in terms of the minority needs of the business Members of the reform movement in San Jose 'were, for the class. One particular concern was to expand and improve the city most part, businessmen who focused much of their energy during streets. The business reformers also wished to control the operation this period toward reshaping the community to meet their own of other public facilities such as lighting, plumbing, paving, l!nd fire specific needs, which in turn, they felt would help the city as a inspection in order to maintain favorable conditions for business. whole . In 1918, an article in the American City. written by the secretary These reformers, despite their claim to have the total commun­ to San Jose's city manager, boasted of streets that were "cleaned, ity interest in mind, sought to reforJU city government to meet watered and otherwise cared for more satisfactorily than at any their own specific goals and needs which excluded much of the previous time." The street lights were changed which saved population from representation or voice in governmental affairs. .. $1,584 a year." But most important, the secretary felt, was that a They were willing to sacrifice popular representation in order to "constant inspection of business property has been achieved; and gain efficiency. The story behind their efforts and ultimate success "regular meetings for the study of properties subject to fire risk will be examined in this study which begins in 1910 and ends with (have] been established, with the result that the city has the lowest the adoption of the new charter in 1916. loss ratio, $ 1.08 per inhabitant, in its history." There was also "a Before reviewing how they gained control, it is more important, five year paving program" and "in all this work, centralized pur­ fi rs t, to obtain a clear picture of who these reformers were and chasing has been used to great advantage.,,2 what they specifically hoped to achieve by implementing the City The fire inspection of business and a special study on fire Manager plan for city government. prevention lessened the risk of costly business fires. All of these improvements, the secretary responded, would lend themselves to THE REFORMERS im'proving the business climate in San Jose. These accomplishments The efforts of the Good Government League to end municipal I were held up by the reformers as their chief contribution to the corruptio n and to bring about reform in San Jose were considered " city. accomplished when its candidates were elected to office in 1902 A steady increase in the physical growth of San Jose was seen and 19Q4. But defeat in 1906 caused the Good Government by the reformers as vital to. the community. Various improvement League reformers to wonder how secure their control really was. groups around the San Jose area supported the drive for growth. They came to see the 1897 charter as the source of their failure The Gardner, Berryessa, and 6th Ward Improvement Clubs incl uded permllnently to control the city council seats. , the need for continued physical growth as one of their goals. The I n 1906, the reformers lost all council seats and the office of Mercury-Herald contrasted the mayoralities of Worswick , a mayor to the revived machine. After a few years of " bossism" the reformer, with Davison through the actual growth of San Jose. reformers came to the conclusion that a new city charter had to be Worswick was held up as an advocate of prosperity and growth drawn up if effective control of the city government was to be while Davison was charged with stifling growth as was evidenced by 3 achieved. the "900 vacant houses" in San Jose. . , After J. O. Hayes, a founding official of the Good Government League, combined the Mercury and the He rald newspapers in 1903, Businessmen hoped for a new increase in San Jose's population. 12 An expected 20,000,000 people, the Mercury -Herald explained, would be drawn to the Pacific States due to the' opening of the Panama Canal.4 This projected growth, the reformers felt , woul be handled to its kfeatest advantage imder the management of reform candidates operating under a new city charter. Many of the reformers sought public office in order to carry out their proposals. The most important reform plan called for a new charter with major changes in the municipal government. In 1915 , this reform charter passed and took effect in 1916 when four reform councilmen were elected. One 'bf them-Elmer E. Chase­ was "a man of marked executive ability which enabled him to achieve a high degree of success."s He was a past President of the Board of Education, Vice-President of the Bank of San Jose (1919), co-owner of Richmond-Chase Company (dealers in fruit and canned fruit) and qUIte active in reform organizations, such as the Commission Government ,League, the Committee of Fifty, and hc was a freeholder fn 191 S. He was elected councilman in 19) 6 which allowed him to implement the municipal reforms he had helped to design. W. L Atkinson and Charles O'Brien were reform­ ers of similar backgrounds who were members of the Commission Government League, the Committee of Fifty; and freeholders of 191 S. They were also elected to office with Chase. Reform organizations in San Jose were mainly formed to espouse specific new plans ~1Jch as the commission form of govern­ ment and amendments to the 1897 charter. Therefore, membership was not based on wide representation from all classes m San Josc but was based upon acceptance 'of the organization's reform ideology, One group not involved in the reform movement was labor. Walter Matthewson, a labor leader and former councilman of San Jose, voiced opposition to reform proposals. He believed that the reformers' plan for a City Manager should allow for a popular 6 recall 01 that manager. He also insisted upon trade union candi­ dates in the election of freeholders. Traditionally the freeholders were property 'owners who were placed in charge of authoring a new charter. Moreover, the reformers required that all candidate wishing to run for freeholder 0 11 the reform ticket must pledge themselves beforehand to support a specific kind of charter, Mat­ thewson and other Labor candidates refused to accept such a proposal and ran as independents not affiliated with the reform ticket. An editorial in the Mercury-Herald opposed the labor claims to representation. The people would not be given "3 square deal where the interests of the labor unions were involved."7 Labor should have some representation, the editor went on to say, "but it -- --- is not sufficiently representative of the 30,000 people who live in &111 Jose Mercury, March 21,1912, Page One this community.,,8 .' The reformers viewed themselves as im partial; as not repre­ commissioners (usually from three to seven)" assumed the tasks senting class interests. They assumed therefore that their city thought of as those of a city councilman, but "each commissioner, charter could be representative of the entire community. They did as an indi.vidual officeholder is head of one of the city's adminis­ not admit to any. special interest~ although their ideology did trative departments.,,9 reflect a business orientation. Their concern over the rapid growth The commission fo rm of government tends to ce'ntralize power of San Jose, the expansion of public facilities such as streets, in to the hands of a few commissioners. Control of these commis­ ighting, and the centralization of power in a few officeholders can sioners by the re formers, in turn, would be a great advantage in be seen as a direct attempt to establish their interests as primary obtaining ordinances favoring their ideology. Old party org:miza­ for lhe entire community of San Jose. These business oriented tions would be de-e mphasized because the election of the Com­ reformers initiated lheir campaign for a change in government by missioners was at large, The relationship of a ward party leader to a way of the Chamber of Commerce, carried out their plan through popularly elected ward councilman would be abolished, making a their organizations with selective membership, and finall y could see city-wide campaign more important in capturing an office than their plan implemented as their own new city councilmen took acquiring patronage at the lower levels. In a ward system, direct office III 1916. Yet, they accused labor of representing sp ecial accountability by a ward councilman to his particular ward gave interests. As a result, they viewed labor's interests as inappropriate citizens a simple course of action for dissatisfaction. In compari­ within the new government. son, a commission elected at large, might not feel so responsible to some local inte. Te~t s . EARLY REFORM EFFORTS The Mercury -lleraid felt the Commission form was deserving of The four years hom 1910 to 1914 can be seen as an effort by enough notice to hire Sarah M. Severance to writc a series of the reformers to discover a form of municipal government that articles explaining the benefits of that plan. Severance described would encompass their ideology. They were not particularl the situation in Galveston that had forced some citizens to write a beholden to anyone of the various plans available, but, in ge neral, new plan for the city. She mentioned that " a tidal wave overran they favored a move tliat would centralize city government. If the island of Galveston and left apparent ruin in its wake. The city power was centraHzed, they felt, a better chance existed to gain had been badly governed, was under saloon rule and graft had done office through a strong city wide campaign. Progressive move ments its work." The cause of the problem could be found in "the large in olher cities at this time were experimenting with such central­ population in that seaport town of low-class foreigners and riff­ ized government . The reformers in San Jose sought to acquaint raff negroes," I 0 • themselves with the features of different forms in order to use Early in 191 0, the San Jose Chamber of Commerce discussed them for their new charter reform. the possibility of the Commission form for San Jose. As a result of The most popular plan during this period was the Commi ssion the interest created, the Commission Government League was form which was first adopted in Galveston, Texas, around the turn formed. This organization met to study the feasibility of adopting of the century. Political scientist, Carl A. McCandless in a recent such a program. After a number of meetings the League proposed book has observed that "lhe most Sign ificant fe ature of the Com­ to Common Council that 15 freeholders be selected in a special mission form is its complete break with the idea of se paration of election for the purpose of framing a new city charter. The Com­ legislature and executive power." He explains that " a group of mon Council declared that the expense of the election prohibited 13 it. As a result, the reformers felt that Common Council was opposed to their reform movement and had used the election expense as an excuse. Reacting to tlus belief, the Commission Government League selected fifty of its members, called the Com­ mittee of Fifty., to write amendments to the existing charter. In thIS way, an election would be required by law when a petitio n signed by 15 percent of the voters called for the adoption of amendments. ese proposed amendments to the 1897 charter placed the If You Really _ . initiative, referendum, recall, and the preferential primary in the legal system of San Jose. But these amendments were only a fi rst IfYou Really An AgaiDst Machine CDDtro~ step. T he Committee of Fifty chairman , Frank Paterson, stated If You ReaDy Are Against petty Politics, tha t the older charter would be converte d into a commi.ssi on govern ment charter. He suggested that " nine-tenths of the charter" If You Want fA) Hear the Real Truth, had been replaced " by the amendme nts an d the remaining tenth considerably modified." I I His understanding of the Commission form was certainly inadequate for he omitted the most vital part, the centralization of authority into a few Commissio ners. But the misunderstanding about the amendments' effect seems to signal the BIG·RALL. ge neral confu sion that the reformers experienced during this period. Most of these efforts at reform were adva nced through separate organizations that had not yet attempted to unify into a single reform group. One of these reform groups was the Women's Civi c Study League, organized for the purpose of reviewing the various forms of municipal government. The women included as their goal the formation of a new city charter. The secretary of the organi­ zation, Zona Williams, stated that "a recent canvass of the busines San Jose Mercury, April 29,1916, Page Two center by a committee from the Civic Study League fou nd the leading merchants strongly in favor of a progressive, up-to-date signed by a "property owner," an attack was made upon the charIer for our city." I 2 The organization considered a poll of the incumbent councilmen w hich accused them of being tools of Loui.s business community to be sufficiently representative of the entir Oneal, the local " boss." T his "property owner" commented that community's interests. the election would demons trate The Civic Study League was so strongly in fa vor of a new .. . whether the people of San Jose wa nt boss rule or popula r charter that it, at first, beca me hostile toward the proposed amend­ rule; whether the jobs of the city hall shall go to henchmen ments. The women members felt that the amendments would only wh o do nothing for their pay but politics for their master, or divert attention away from the actual need for a completely new to be clean capable men who are good citizens and are accus­ charter. They did not want to amend the old one, they wa nted an tomed only to a fair wage for fair service. I 5 entirely new document. However, they softened their stand since they did end up supporting the amenoments -that were endorsed by This author further castigated the opposition in the same article by the newspaper and the leading merchants t hey had canvassed. accusing the "Oneal hench men" of controlling the police and fire Work ing for a completely new city cllarter was the goal of still commission, of c\m>ing the Chinese lotteries and gambling place another group-the Citizen's Charter Committee-with Mrs. A. A. and then opening others from which they would reap Jarger p rofits. Fowler acting as the chairwoman. Her rationale was one frequently Most 01 the attack upon Oneal and his "gang" was not supported expressed in Progressive Era municip al reform circles: "when a by specific details of t he alleged corruption. It is, therefore, extremely difficult to determine from this and other articles what business is sick, an efficiency expert is sen t for. The corporation of actually took place. Undou btedly corruption withjn the com­ Slin Jose is mighty sick and the logical thing to do is to gel a city munity was widespread, but why the reformers were not more government doctor." I 3 The reformers advocated the use of outside "experts" schooled in the art of mu nicipal management who would speCific ill their attack remains a mystery. For that matter, they guide the city in the direction of efficiency as opposed to "speCial co ul d have attem pted prosecution because the incumbent police interest" representation. judge was on the reformer's own tic.ket, so he was presumably The search fo r an appro priate method of reform that would uncorrupted and acceptable to them. It appears that those attack allow the reformers to gain control of the city offices was conduc­ were primarily campaign rhetoric and possibly mere presumption'" ted by several orga nizations in this early period. Some of th n the part of the reformers. cha nges they proposed were based on a poor in terpretation of the In any event, only the Municipal Conference ticket, headed by a ommission system. There had not been enough research done by reform incumbent oo uncilman, Fred R. Husted, was given space in the reformers as a·group to gi ve adequate shape ( 0 a distinct reform Sail Jose Mercury, April 2, J916, Pagerourteen charter. Consequently, each organization felt that it was best qualified to lead the movement for municipal change. Even the Mercury -Herald opposed the reform aJu l.:ndment's in 1.9 I 2 whll n an llditorial stated tha t " the charter has its imperfections, it is true, but these have been greatly overstated. The charter is ~uf­ Shall Fate of the New rter ficient. ,,14 Eventually this newspaper was to give full support to the amend mentsjusl before their pas~age in 1914. Whatever the reasons gIve n by some organizations for their Be Left to Po initial opposition to the charter amendments, it remained a fact that by the time they came to a vole, all the reformers supported them. As the reformers had been dispersed into se.parale organi­ zations, each with separate goals, they had been unable to elect a mayor or councilmen in the eh:ctions of 19 10 tl nd 1912. Two years later they unified and won the ejection of 19 l4-and soon achieved their long desired goa l of a new charter. THE MUN1CLPAL ELECTION OF 1914 During lhe 191 4 election lhe reform ers revised their tactics somewhat in order to achieve success at the polls. At least one tactic, however, remained the same. The harsh la nguage that had been characteristic of reform rhetoric in previous campaigns TIle New ellirrer Club emerged once again. The Mercury -Herald encouraged comments (. _.,1' ...,~tIW err••~'" against the opp6sition ticket which was composed of many incum­ bents from the existing administration. In a fro nt page articl 14 I EOF THE POUTICIA •

our new chatter fall into the hands of politi­ s, there is only lone power that can help you, and that i Almighty.h-Prof. Ree

SDn Jose Mercury . April 22, 1916, Page One the Mercury-Herald to expouse its views on what city government emphasized, for the reformers' victory was instrumental in the sllould and could be like. Dean J. H. Campbell of the law depart­ subsequent develo pment of San Jose. The city government now ment at the University of Santa Clara and a supporter of the was controlled by the refo rmers, who quickly pursued-their stated Municipal Conference ticket, discussed "what is t he matter with plan to install a more businesslike charter in San Jose, th us ridding San Jose?" He recounted the numerous attributes of San Jose; the city of what they considered "corruption" and ··boss rule" climate, scenery, geographical position, aU of which he considered politics. to be the best in the world. And yet, said Dean Campbell, "we are the jest of the state." He suggested that all the maj or cities in the T FREEHOLDERS ELECTION state had once " hoped to emulate this city in growth and pro­ Although the reformers gained power in 191 4 , their victory was gress." But he added, " see how they have outstripped us in the not so overwhelming as to guarantee their comple te control over race, and continue to outstrip us. What is the matter? It is simply' the coming freeholders election. Consequently a concen trated pub­ our rotten politics." The Dean continued his catalogue of ills: licity drive was mounted via the Mercury-Herald through editoria ls and individual articles provided by members of the Citizens' San Jose stood for 30 years past in the front rank of political Charter Committee. The refo rmers were now settled in their minds iniquity. There is no practice so vile, to deprive the people of as to what type of city government was best for San Jose. Greatly their choice and to corrupt politics and debauch voters that influenced by the ideas and articles of University of California it has not been tried, in this city. What is it that brought Political Science Professor Thomas H. Reed, the reformers decided about the present state in San Jose? One of the things is the to promote the city manager type of government over the much possibility of putting men in office by a minority vote. That discussed commission form, since the former best exemplified their is what gives the boss and the gangster his power. A man so interest in the efficiency and expertise of business managers. elected does not represent the majority; he re presents a Reed apparently convinced the reformers that the commission minority, and a corrupt minority at that, that fs, the gang. government plan met only part of the requirement needed to Members of the reform ticket, including Dr. A. C. Jayet, J. J. achieve an efficient and uncorrupt governmen t. He agreed that the McLauren and Ben Sellers also made-similar statements about their commission "system has resulted in establishlng our city govern­ concern for San Jose. "Honest Ben" Sellers went so far as to avow: ment upon an honest basis," but commissioners were not experts "I have nothing to offer you except my services. I am willing to in their fields. " They are amateurs in the art of administration," sacrifice my business to serve the city two years and help make it said Reed, and in "the business of government, amateurs cannot what it should be.,,1 7 These remarks were typical of the campaign successfully compete with professionals." For small cities, speeches that covered the front pages of the Mercury -Herald during especially, suggested Reed, a "more satisfactory" expression "of the two week period prior to the election. Also typical was the the demand for expert service, is the City Manager. ,,20 Municipal Conference group equation of the opposition with cor­ "The administrator" said Reed, "has no concern with 'policy,' ,. ruption while pushing their own ticket as being honest and the true except to offer such suggestions and advice as his experience 'J representatives of the people. warrants. The administrator's relation to the people," Reed contin­ The Conference ticket published its platform in the Mercury­ ued, " is the same that is borne _by the general manager and other Herald. Its priorities were clear. "San Jose must be free" the principal executive officers of a corporation to its stockholders." reformers proclaimed, "and we consecrate ourselves and our Therefore the administrator " should be appointed, not elected, and candidates to the task -of ridding the city of boss rule and its should be removed as far as possible from the immediate effects of attendant evils. To that end," the reformers added, public opinion.,,21 With the same thought in mind, the Citizens' Charter Committee advised cymcs, We also strongly recommend the adoption of the four amendments proposed by the Citizens' Charter committee, ... to look around, where they will see that practically all namely, the preferential primary, the recall, initiative, and large successful business concerns in San Jose are governed referendum, and we include the prop'osed amendment giving by a charter which directs that th e stockholders (the people) 18 shall elect a board of directors (a board of councilr!en) who a weekly rest day to city employees. 2 shall employ a president or manager, one or both. . The most important aspect of their platform included their favor­ ing "the adoption of a new charter of the commission business­ In their publicity drive prior to the freeholders election, the manager plan." The reformers further indicated that they hoped reformers demanded that San Jose include in its plans for a new that "it may be ratified by the legislature in 1915.,,19 After their charter the adoption of a city manager who would direct the city's election in May of 1914, the vi ctorious reform ticket quickly affairs in the same way that a general manager might direct corpo­ pursued this specific aim, for in February of the following year an rate policy. They further suggested, like Reed, that this "exoert" election was held to elect freeholders to adopt a new charter for not be subject to recall or election by the populace. As one article San Jose. The importance of the 1914 election cannot be over­ stated, "the people, the voters, cannot know the fitness or lack of SDn Jose Mercury, May 13, 1914, Page One R ] IS .. then in the very nature of municipal government the mana~er should be an employee of the council-not an elected officer." 5 With these ideas and goals in mind, the reform administration in conjunction with members of the Citizens' Charter Committee VOTE FOR-lOUR GOOD BUSINESS MEN selected a group of candidates to present to the public for approvaJ LARGE tax-pilyer and a prominent business man of in the ensuing February election. Each candidate was interviewed thi.. Cit}·, dl.5cusslng the local political situation on and expected to give a pledge to uphold and support the new Wcdn~.day, said he expected to vote for the entire charter. that was prepared by members of the Citizens' Charter A H . Committee and their " expert," Thomas Reed. 26 Charter Club tkkct, The opposition to the new charter plan came from a lo ng time labor leader and former councilman, Walter G. Mathewson. . = J Mathewson conceded to the idea of charter revision or refo rm but Sail Jose Mercury, Apnl 27,1916, Page One objected to the Charter Committee's cut and dried method of writing the new document. He called fo r further discussi on and r ;;;;__ ~iiiiiii= ==::::=~:=:=====:==:;;::::=:====:=:=::::::=--~l debale and t he removal of t he pledge t hat boun d can didates t o the total support of the charter. 27 Totally commit ted to the abilIties of t heir "expert," the Charter Commit tee refused d ebate and would only allow members of labor to place themselves as Comrtlit­ tee-endorsed candidates if they pledged support for the documen t. As can be expected the opposition refused, thereby forcing Mathewson to challenge the Committee by placing his own candi­ dates on the ballot. The independent candidates and their sup porters raised n umer­ ous q uestions about the proposed charter. Their main objection to the "Reed charter" was, surprisingly, published by the Mercury­ Herald a week prior to the election. Taking advantage of the n'ewspaper's unusual generosi ty toward individuals opposed to its the ew views, Mathewson outlined his position which clearly indicates that his o bjections were focused upon t he role of the city manager in local government. Unlike the reformers, Ma thewson could no{ ring San foresee that a successful businessman would give " up that business and accept the re sponsibility of managing the affairs of the city if his position was for a given term" and be subject to t he control of a majority of the council "who are them selves com pell ed to play politics to 11 0W their position." Mathewson stated that h e did not condemn the business manager sy stem, "if that system was one where the manager was absolutely independent of the council 3l1d subject only to the will of the people." He further added that " the people as a whole would rather retain their right to select their own 2 officers." 8 What Mathewson feared was the loss o f representation and control by the people over the affatrs of t he city. He felt that a business manager might well promote efficiency but that h e should be subject to recall by the populace. Another member of the o pposition, L. C. DeCarli, objected to the in creased n umber of officers that were to be appointed instead o f elected. He also opposed t he failure of the new charter to lirni bond indebtedness to five percent, and "to the clause givmg into t he hands of the scbool board sole authority at any time that it desires to make a demand upon the city authorities for a rate o f 25 percent additional taxes for school purposes, such ·compliance being mandatory.,,2 9 Since the Citizens' Charter Committee and membE!rs of Mathew­ on's group could nol come to 'an agreement, both groups entered andidates in the February election. The reformers were basically businessmen who wanted local government to be in control of members of their own class who equated business efficiency with public interest. T he opposition, aJthough having members from the business or more wealthy class, ap peared, for the most part, to represent members of labor and the lower classes. Under the new proposal they had the most to lose; the right to participate in local affairs, unlike the reformers who had everything to gain since the new city official was to he a business "expert." It is interesting to note tha t the refonners attacked their oppon­ ents as being members of "boss rule" politics and not as repre­ senting the total community but only "minority" interests. The Mercury-Herald in :lDswering the question why certain individuals opposed the "Reed Charter" revealed more about the reformer ••.• v_ - -"~.,, ',: rt... .0 ': I themselves than aDout theiT opponents. In one article, wntien a . few days prior to t he election. the Mercury argued that "the old line politicians" were men "schooled in the art of minority and fitness of the candidates who would aspire to be elected to that ~oss rule." The Mercury, furt her attemp.ted to ,explain thaL.tl?-e y important position.,,2" In addition to their blunt evaluatio n of .came 111 at the last. moment and placed ID. the fI eld an oPPosltIon popular democracy, the reformers also repea ted a metaphor often tIcket, thereby seekmg to control ~h e election of fr~eholde.rs, who h d d . g the Progressive Era' are to prepare a new charter, the mstrument that IS to gUide and ear unn , . direct destinjes of San Jose." Conceding that the opposition were The corporation called San Jose is co m pos~ d of 15,000 "representative citizens," the Mercury, however, believed that they stockholders (electors). U the charter reqUi red them to el ect were not fit to be freeholders because " it is evident that they have a business manager they would almost certainly make a not waked up to ~e fact that business methods can be appli ed to botch of it?4 ,ci ty government." 0 Members of the Charter Committee were convinced that if "the The refo rmers' substitution of one minority for another i manager must act under and by the authority of .. . [the council) , exemplified by their conduct in presenting candidates to the public 16

~ which disallowed any debate or discussion over the proposed choo~e candidates presented by the city's Civil Service Commis­ charter. They specificallywanted the ci ty manager free from public sion. 3 control so he could conduct his affairs unrestrained. An important In contrast to the old charter, the seven councilmen lost most of question arises however: how could the populace be q ualified to their appointment powers to the city manager. They retained the pick men to serve as councilmen and yet not be q ualified to select righ t to appoint only the city clerk (who was elected under the old the city manager appoirrted by those council men? T he reformers, charter) and three member boards of the Civil Service Com miSSion of course, advised the populace to elect only quali fied businessmen and the City Planning Commission. None of the new council men as councilmen thereby ensuring the selection of the right cit y were elected from wa rds and they now served six year terms manager. instead of four. 34 These offic ials were not paid well , in fac t, they THE CHARTER were given less than under the old charter. This is extremely Significant, for the new positi ons were now more likely to be Desl?ite the relatively strong opposition, the reformers were restricted to members of the co mmunity who had an in dependent elected as freeholders o n February 4, 19 15. The new charter was ource of income. As a result th e first elected officials were all approved by the people in April of the same year and passed o n to businessmell who clearly represented a single class or strata of the state legislature for final approval. Reformers W. L. Atkin son, socie ty. It is also significant t hat the board members appointed by Elmer E. Chase, Charles M . O'Brien and Elton Shaw were all t he council or city manager all served without compensation, thus elected to tlIe new council in 19 16. Also elected to t he expanded again restricting membership to the more wealthy or leisure class. council 'were three Munidpal Conference ticket incumbents from The only officials receiving high salaries were the " experts" which 19 14, A. C. Jayet. 1. F . McLauri n and Ben Sellers. Atkinson. Chase included the City Attorney, City Engineer, and, of course, the City and O'Brien were aU members of the freeholders elected in 19 15, Manager. while Shaw served as a fire and police commissioner between 191 4-15. These men, as expected, unall imously appointed Thomas EV ALU ATION H. Reed as the city's first City Manager,3 1 Reed held office fo r During the Progressive Era San Jose was'Cxpected to expand and two years before returning to Berkeley to continue his work on adopt many of the new technological in novations that were gener­ municipal management. aUy being accepted across the nation. The need to create an A comparative analysis of the two charters will give a more efficient local· gove rnment that could provi de these community complete and better understa nd ing as to the nature of change that services ra pidly became apparent. The old cha rI er, the reformers occurred in 19 16 and the effect it had upon overall community felt, inhibited the local officia ls from making rapid progress representation. The only significant amendments added to the old because it allowed for too much discussion lind debate amo ng the ch arter were approved in 1914 when the preferential primary, the different ele ments of the community. A new ull-to-date charter recall, re ferendum and the initiative were placed into the old seemed to be the only answer to accommodate ral)id change and document. The old charter, dating back to 18 97, provided for a potential growth. T hese businessmen reformers foresaw the pos­ mayor, treasurer, and city clerk to be elected by the people for two sible stagnation of economic development unless the community year terms. The mayor was restricted to serving only two consec­ was able to expand and altraclnew business an d industry . In o rder utive terms. In addition, five councilmen we re elected for fou r to prosper themselves; they felt tha t the communily must be made years with one councilma n serving the city at-l arge while the to attract others. With these ideas in mind, Ule reformers became remainder represented their respective wards. Although the ward q uite willing to sacrifice popul ar n:presentation in order to gain the representatives had to resi de i n their ward districts, they were much needed efficiency. Thcy finally achieved their goal in 19 16 elected by the total community. The mayor had the power to when the eity adopted its first business manager charter. appoint all t he high city officials (whose terms expired dUring his The consequences that resulted from the framing of that charler tenure) with the consent of the common council. Included among under the city manager plan became readily apparent. PopUlar these appointments were five member boards of Health, Education, control over civic affairs was effectivel y curtailed with the elimina­ Free Public Li brary Trustees, Park Commissioners and boards of tion Qf the city's most important publi c official from the control police and fire commissioners who all served without compen­ of the electorate and by the elimination of the ward system of sation. T he appointed salaried officials who received decent pay re presentation. These changes ensured lhat only the busi ness class (ranging from $ 1200-$2,000 annually) included .the cit~ attorney, was elected to the city council. Since the council was to appoint chief of police, city engineer and street superintendent.3 the most .important man in city government-the city manager­ The new charter replaced the elected mayor with a high salaried the council must therefo re consis t of those most qualified to pick city manager, who became responsible for directing city policy and the right man. The r.esults, of course, left much of the populace preparing the ' annual budget. He was appointed and subject to practically void of a politic'a l voice in local affairs since only recaU only by the common council. He had the absolute power to members of a certain segment of the community determined what appoint most of the city's officials without the consent of the was 'good for all. The people of San Jose, as in many other parts of council. He wa s granted the power to appoint his own city trea­ the nation during the Progressive Era, were led to believe that surer, who was previously elected. He was restricted only in his efficien cy in govern ment was much more important than their appointment of the chiefs of fire and police in that he had to right to equaJ'representation. San Jose Mercury , April 23, 1916, Page Ten Us Put.San Into 'the Hands Let • Jose

lAI ... _ c....u... ,. "",...... •to...... -. -.141_ ., .... J_ ....,...... ,....., fa ...... /aIoritI ...... ,.,...... J_ £oi.r" ...... "'r s••, ~ Ihte ."".,...... ",. .. ,_ c..,dtwn .. ~ .... -'" .... _-.,,...... -.., ...... ~,.,...".. ',A_.. 'NIl""" 10 ...... tit • _"'...... IW/~ 1rIoot ...... ""- T ___c_.. _...... ,...... - Is lllere • .".,.. .,.., ...., ,..,1 -II I, ..".,., .,.1, .uo..1 Ibll Ia Us meet ~ O'Briea. to Do

17 The rernperate Progressives of Santa Cruz, 1906-l9l6 Philip Wright and Jon Gundersgaard

Prior to 1866 the dty of Santa Cruz was not recognized by the elected by the voters or whose appointment was not specifically' state of California as a "legal" city si nce it had never incorporated provided for in the charter; the remaining members o f city govern­ itself. There had never been a need for any clear form of municipal ment, who were to be elected every two years, were the City governmen t since Santa Cruz was a small agricultural town. But in At'torney, the Police Judge, the Chief of Police, the Superintendent 1866 Santa Cruz inhabitants saw a need for some type of city of Streets and Parks and members of the Board of E duC

20 ..

13. Mercury, April 19, 1902, p. 1. 15. Mercury, May 16,1914, p. 1. 14. Mercury, April 5, 1902, p. 2. 16. Ibid., May 17, 1914, p. 3. 15. Mercury, M.ay 22, 1902, p. 4; reprinted from the San Frallcisco Call, 17 . Ibid. May 21 , 1902. 18. Ibid., May 13, 1914, p. 1. 16 . Mercury, MaIch 23, 1902, p. 8. 19. Ibid. 17 . Oakland Enquirer, May 21 , 1902, cited in the Mercury, May 22. 20. Thomas H. Reed, Government for the People (New York: B. W. 1902, P: 4. It was the observa tion of the- Fresno Republica/l on May 20, Huebsch, 19 15 }, PI'. 200·203. 1902, that Rea was a handicap to the citizens' ticket, rather than an asset. It 21. Ibid., p. 198. is my opinion, however, that Rea was a defmjte plus for that ticket. 22. Mercury, hnuary 3D, 1915, p. 7. 18. Mercury, May 23, J 902, p. 2. 23. Ibid. 19. Mercury, April 20, 1902, p. 4. 24. Ibid. 20. Mercury, April 9, 1902, p. 4. 25. Ibid. 21. Mercury , April 29, 1902. p. I. 26. Ibid.,January 8, 1915, p. 1. 22. Mercury, May 11, 1902, pp. I and 4. 27. Ibid., January 13. 1915, p. 1. 23. Mercury, February 14, 1903, p. 4; February 16. 1903; p. 4; Febru · 28. Ibid., January 25, 1915, p. 7. ary 19, l.903, p. 1. 29. Ibid., p. 9. 24. Mercury, April 5, 1904, p. 1. These figures were taken fro m a post 30. Ibid. , Fl;,)Jruary I, 1915. p. 7. office department survey accordjng to the Mercury. T hey do not cojnc.lde 31 . Sawyer, Santa Clara COUllty, pp. 174·7S. with the figures from other sources. It would appear that these figures were 32. San Jose City Charter, 1897. used to increase Worswick's chances of re·election. 33. San Jose City Charter, 1916. 25. Mercury, May 1, 1904, p. 1. 34. Ibid. 26. Mercury , April 6, 1904, p. 1. 27. Mercury, April 25 , 1904, p. 1. THE TEMPERATE PROGRESSIVES OF 28. Mercury ; April 14, 1904, p. 1. SANTA CRUZ, 1906·1916 29 . Mercury, Apri128. 1904, p. 4;May 4.1904, p. I; May 5, 1904, p. 1. By PHILIP WRIGHT .and JON GUNDERSGAARD 30. Mercury , April 30, 1904, p. 1. I . Santa Cruz Sentinel, July 28, 1906, p. 1. 31. MercurY ,' A pri I9, 1904, p. l. 2. Ibid., October 30, 1906, p. 3. McPherson was more sharply cri ti­ 32 , Mercury , February 16, 1903, p. 4; February 19, 1903, p. 3. cized during the preparation of the 191 1 charter when an opposition .33 . Mercury , February 19, 1903;p. 4. newspaper, Th e Surf. commented tha t "with some notable exceptions we do not consi der lawyers and editors good charter makers." The Surf was CENTRAUZAnON AND EFFICIENCY: referring to McPherson. The Sur!. October 27 , 191 0, p . 2. THE REFORMERS SHAPE MODERN SAN JOSE 3. Solita Cruz Sentinel. August 25 , 1906, p. I . SAN JOSE GOVERNMENT, 191()'1916 4. Ibid. , September 26, 1906, p. I. 5. /)/illlHes of the Commissioll Council, Santa Cna. Calij ornia, p. 222. By VALERIE ELLSWORTH and ANDREW J . GARBELY 6. Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 23, 1907 , p. I. 1. San Jose Mercury-8eraJd, March 7, 1913. p. 4; May 5 ,1 9 10. I 7. Ibid. , October 23. 1910, p. 6. Also. see Robert Burton and ThoJllils 2. Mabel L. Hammett, 'The Proof of the Pudding is in t.he Ea ting," L. McHugh. Samuel Leask: Transplanted Scot Citizen Par Excellence The A merican City, V?1. xvm No.5, May, 1918. p. 426. (reiton, California: The Village Prin t Shop. 1964), p. 28. I 3. Mercury , Apnl 20 ,1912, p, 7. 8. Soma Cru:! Selllmel, Odobcr 30, J91 0, p. 8. . j' 4. Ibid., May S, 1910, p. 1. 9. Ibid 5. Eugene T . Sawyer, Histo/)· oj Santa Clara County with BIographICal 10. Ibid., November 2, 1910, p. I . •

Sketches (Los AQgeles: H~loric Record, 1922), p. 844, II I t. Ibid. , Novem be r 4, 1910, p. 1. \ 6. Mercury, January 25 , 1915, p. 7. , _ 1. 2. Hodgchead spoke in Santa Crul, December 10, 19 10. Ibid., Decem­

7. rbld., May5 , 19 10, p.L berI O, 19 10, p.1. II 8. Ihid. 13. Ibid. , November JO, 19 10, p. 8. 9. Cil rl A. McCandless, UrlJan G o~' q ll me,, ( and Politics (St. Louis: l4. San ta Cruz City Charter oI1911. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1970), p. 166. 15. Santa Cruz Sentillel, Octobl" r 4.1914, p. 2. Unsigned k: lter to the 10. Mercury, January 5,1912, p. 7. editor. 11. Ibid., October 9,1911. 1{). Ibid. 12. Ibid., January 5, 19 13, p. 26 . 17. Ibid., October 6, 1914, p. 2. Editorial. 13 . Ibid., April 7,1914, p. 8. 18. Samuel Leask, Some. Memories of 01/ Uprooted and Transplallled 14 . Ibid., January 12, 1912. Scot (n. p., 1955), pp. 180·81. I

,

21 heAuthors

PATRICIA K. CANNON received her M.A. degree last year. She is bo th as a paid, and un p ai~ politJcal organi zer in Santa Cruz, currently a So cial St u dies instructo r at Soquel HigD School California, Soquel, California. JOHN L. BERBERICH has completed two years of teaching Social DAVID W. EAKINS is a Professor of History and Humanities at Studies and Math at the Junior High School level and iscurrentl San Jose State University. He has been teaching there since 1962. working in the l ames W. Gerard' Papers at the University of Montana in fulfillment of his Master's Thesis. He is also working on VALERIE ELLSWO RTH is currently working for the £ity of San some revisionist research in early California history. Jose in the Parks and Recreation Depll rtment. She has taught high school as a Social Sciences instructor in several schools in Santa RICHARD L. WAKEFIELD is presently employed as a letter Clara County. carrier in the United States Postal Service in Sunnyvale, California. He is also a vacation replacement supervisor. He has been President JOSEPH GARBELY received his M.A. degree last year. He is now of the EI Camino Little League fo r the past two years and has teacbing English in a small mining community (Rafsanjan) in spent the last' Jom years as a football cQach in a youth football soltthem Iran. prbgram.

JON GUNDERSG AA RD received his M.A. degree last year. He was I PIDL WRIGHT earned his M.A. in History last year. He is currentl y then employed for nine months on the campaign of a narrowly .employed by Santa Cruz County as Senior Buyer in the Purchasing unsuccessfu l candidate for Congress. Since then he has worked Department.

22