Story of the Session of the California Legislature of 1909 Part 26

[100a] The Fish and Game Commission was very bitter against Polsley and all who approved his course. Because of the incident, Game Warden Welch of Santa Cruz County lost his position. Welch was a county official, paid by the county. The Commission complained that he had written a letter to Polsley commending the a.s.semblyman for his effort to secure a report 'from the Commission. Santa Cruz County receives a monthly stipend from the Commission toward the support of the Brookdale hatchery. The writer is reliably informed that one of the Commissioners stated that the Commission would do nothing for Santa Cruz County so long as "that man Welch" remained in office. Welch was removed by the Supervisors. Welch has a national-wide reputation as a game warden, and such papers as the "Forest and Stream," New York, and "Sports Afield,"

Chicago, have joined the California press in denunciation of his dismissal.

As these pages are going through the press, word comes from Santa Cruz that Welch has been reinstated by Judge Lucas F. Smith of the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County.

In summarizing his findings, Judge Smith holds that the local Board of Supervisors exceeded its legal power in declaring vacant the office of voluntary warden, which Welch held; exceeded its legal authority in removing Welch without specific charges being prepared, notice served on him and an opportunity given for a hearing.

[101] All sorts of estimates have been made of the income that would have been enjoyed by the Fish and Game Commission, had this bill become a law. The lowest that the writer knows of, made by a disinterested person, places the increase at $50,000 a year.

[102] Some of the commission's expense accounts on file with the State Controller are curiosities. For example, General Stone when he is on commission business taxes the fund $1 for breakfast, $1 for lunch, $1 for dinner. It thus costs the Commission three annual hunter's licenses to feed General Stone for a day.

Chapter XXV.

The Rewarding of the Faithful.

Senators and a.s.semblymen Whose Votes Were Cast Against Reform Measures Given State and Federal Positions in Some Instances, in Others Appointed to Holdover Committees or Sent on Trips at the Expense of the State.

The machine has many ways of rewarding the faithful who persist until the end. The faithful member of Senate or a.s.sembly may be rewarded by a Federal appointment (Senator Bates has just been graciously recognized in this way[102a]) or he may be given a State job (witness Senator Price or a.s.semblyman Beardslee) ; or he may be put on a legislative hold-over committee to investigate something, or to represent the State at something, or to prepare some kind of a bill to be introduced at the next session of the Legislature.

This last is perhaps the most genteel method of reward. It entails little work, gives the beneficiary a certain distinction and pays very well.

Nine Senators were rewarded in this way in the closing hours of the session of 1909. There might have been ten, but that prince of "bandwagon" Senators, Welch, had to be rewarded twice, so but nine got holdover committeeships. They are Wolfe, Welch, Wright, Willis, Leavitt, Bills (labeled Republicans), Kennedy, Hare and Curtin (labeled Democrats). The names of the nine are not unfamiliar. With the exception of that of Curtin, their votes during the session were consistently cast on the side of the machine. For them to be rewarded came as a matter of course.

The machine will continue to reward such men until the people take the Legislature out of machine hands. But that is another story.

The Legislative Holdover Committee is about as useless a thing as can be imagined. This is very well ill.u.s.trated by the State's experience with the so-called Harbors Committee, appointed by the Legislature of 1907 to inquire into harbor conditions throughout the State.

The committee consisted of three Senators and three a.s.semblymen. The Senators managed to incur expenses of $2,524.20. a.s.semblymen were more modest. Their expenses were only $1,851.80, making a total expense charge for the committee of $4,376.

But the $4,376 covers the committee's expenses only, does not provide compensation for the committeemen. A bill appropriating $6,000 for that purpose was introduced at the session of 1909. This gave the committeemen $1,000 each for their services. It made the investigation cost the State $10,376[102b].

The Harbors Committee - or somebody or something else, the writer is not sure which - prepared an elaborate report of the committee's findings.

But owing to a surprising blunder that involved Senator Wolfe most curiously, the report was not filed until March 23, the day before the Legislature adjourned. The report was ordered printed in the journal, but it did not appear in the journal of the 23rd, which was circulated on the morning of the 24th. Instead, was a note to the effect that it would appear in the corrected journal. So, few knew that it had been filed at all, and it went unnoticed by the daily press.

But the details of the report[102c] were known to the general public long before it was filed with the Senate, and its provisions made Senator Wolfe appear to exceptional disadvantage. Wolfe was a member of the Harbors Committee, as was Senator Wright. Among the recommendations set forth in the report as originally prepared, was one that forty-four blocks only of land be purchased by the State for the improvement of the San Francisco Harbor at Islais Creek, instead of the sixty-three blocks necessary for practical harbor development.

Senator Wolfe was a warm advocate of the sixty-three block plan which is the only practical plan, by the way, and shows that Senator Wolfe can land on the right side of things occasionally. But it was very discouraging for Senator Wolfe to be confronted with the unfiled report of his own Harbors Committee, endorsed by his own signature as committeeman, in which the purchase of only forty-four blocks was urged.

Senator Wolfe's defense was ingenious. He stated that he had signed the report as a matter of courtesy, not really knowing what it contained.

The incident ill.u.s.trates the value to the State of such legislative investigations.

But in spite of the curious history of Wolfe's Harbors Committee, he was given another holdover committee in 1909. The Senate - on Wolfe's motion - adopted a resolution setting aside $5,000 to meet the expenses of a holdover committee to consist of three members to investigate the cause of recent advances in the cost of foodstuffs. Senators Wolfe, Welch and Hare are honored with the appointments. Lieutenant-Governor Porter appointed.

Senator Wolfe, from the machine standpoint, certainly earned the distinction thus thrust upon him, and his share of the money. Senator Wolfe was not in good health during the session, but in spite of his indisposition he managed to be present in the Senate Chamber, where often, pale, haggard and plainly on the verge of breakdown, he fought valiantly against the reform measures which were aimed at the prestige of the State machine, and the domination of the tenderloin, the Southern Pacific Railroad, the racetrack gamblers and allied interests in State politics.

Wolfe led the fight against the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill, against the Local Option bill, against the effective Stetson Railroad Regulation bill, against the Direct Primary bill, against admitting Senator Bell of Pasadena to the Republican caucus, against the bill to prohibit the sale of intoxicants within a mile and a half of Stanford University, against the initiative amendment to the Const.i.tution, against the amendment to the Const.i.tution to correct ambiguities as to the powers and duties of the State Railroad Commission, and against Burnett's resolution for the investigation of the cause of the increase in freight rates and express charges. Senator Wolfe also led the fight for the pa.s.sage of the Change of Venue bill.

Curiously enough, Senator Wolfe's stock argument, used in most of the opposition to reform measures, was to the effect that if such measures became laws, the Republican party in California would be undermined.

Senator Wolfe's argument had great weight with Republicans like Leavitt and Weed and Democrats like Hare and Kennedy. For the "good of the Republican party," these gentlemen generally voted as Senator Wolfe dictated.

Senator Welch, the second member of the Pure Food Committee, is at least ent.i.tled to gracious consideration at the hands of the Wolfe-Leavitt element. Senator Welch was one of the twenty-seven Call-heralded heroes who defeated the Wolfe-Leavitt element in the first fight on the Direct Primary bill in the Senate. And Senator Welch was one of the seven heroes who "flopped" to the Wolfe-Leavitt side when the psychological moment came. Welch's one vote in the final struggle would have decided the Direct Primary fight for the side of the reform element. But when the reform element needed Welch he was found snugly quartered with Wolfe and Leavitt.

Welch voted for the Walker-Otis bill, but he was one of the last members of the Senate to be counted for that measure. Indeed, Welch caught the rear of the bandwagon on that issue just in time.

On railroad issues Welch's record is as good as the Southern Pacific Railroad could wish. He voted against the adoption of the practical absolute rate, and for the impracticable maximum rate; he voted for the ineffective Wright bill and against the effective Stetson bill. He voted against the Const.i.tutional Amendment simplyfying the wording of the Const.i.tution in those sections which prescribe the powers and duties of the Railroad Commissioners.

So Senator Welch had his appointment to the Food Investigation Committee due him. He was also made member of the Legislative Committee to represent the State at the Alaska-Yukon Exposition, of which more later.

Thus Senator Welch rounded out the session very satisfactorily to Senator Welch and to the machine, if not to the State of California.

Senator Hare is down in the legislative records as a Democrat. He voted on most measures consistently under the lead of Wolfe and Leavitt. His appointment need not, therefore, cause surprise.

When the Direct Primary bill was before the Senate Committee on Election Laws, Hare's vote was with those of Wolfe and Leavitt to make the measure as ineffective as possible. Hare was among the thirteen unworthies who voted against the measure when the first fight was made for it on the floor of the Senate; he was among the twenty who finally, under Wolfe's leadership, held the measure up in the Senate until by trick it could be amended to the machine's liking. Hare was one of the seven Senators who voted against the Walker-Otis Anti-Gambling bill. He was one of those who voted for the pa.s.sage of the Change of Venue bill.

On railroad measures Hare voted against the Stetson bill and for the Wright bill, against the absolute rate and for the maximum rate. He voted against the amendment to the Const.i.tution to clear up the alleged ambiguity regarding the powers and duties of the Railroad Commissioners.

Lack of s.p.a.ce prevents continuance of the review of Hare's votes. But enough has been said to show that this "Democrat" was ent.i.tled to the honor at the hands of the Performer, Republican Lieutenant Governor Warren Porter, of appointment to the Holdover Committee which, under the leadership of Senator Eddie Wolfe, will investigate the cause of the increase in the price of foodstuffs.

But a far more desirable appointment was to the committee which is to represent the State at the Alaska-Yukon Pacific Exposition. By concurrent resolution the Senate and a.s.sembly decided that seven Senators, seven a.s.semblymen, one Lieutenant Governor (Warren Porter) and one Governor (Gillett) should attend the exposition at the State's expense. For this purpose $7,000 of the State's money has been provided.

The seven Senators appointed by Performer Porter are Wright, Willis, Welch, Leavitt, Bills, Kennedy, Curtin.

The seven a.s.semblymen appointed by Speaker Stanton are Transue, Beardslee, Leeds, Hewitt, McMa.n.u.s, McClellan and Schimtt.

The records of the Senators thus honored show them worthy the machine's consideration. Their votes on the banner measures before the Legislature last winter were as follows:

Against the Walker-Otis bill, to prohibit poolselling and bookmaking (Anti-Gambling bill) - Leavitt - 1.

For the Walker-Otis bill-Bills, Curtin, Kennedy, Willis, Welch, Wright - 6.

Only seven Senators voted against the Walker-Otis bill. Of the seven Leavitt is given the Alaska trip; Wolfe and Hare are put on the Food Investigation Committee. Thus of nine Senators who got on holdover committees three were among the seven who voted in the interest of the gambling element.

The records made by the State Senators who will attend the exposition at the State's expense in the Direct Primary fight are quite as suggestive.

When the first attempt was made in the Senate to force the machine amendments into the bill, February 18, the seven Senators voted as follows:

For the machine's amendments - Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt, Willis.

Against the machine's amendments - Curtin, Welch, Wright.

Thirteen Senators on February 18 voted for the machine's amendments. Of their number Hare and Wolfe are on the Food Investigation Committee; Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt and Willis are to attend the exposition at the State's expense. Thus six of the thirteen have been rewarded.

The machine, having failed to amend the Direct Primary bill in the Senate, amended it in the a.s.sembly. When the measure was returned to the Senate, six of the seven Senators who will attend the exposition voted to concur in the a.s.sembly amendments. They were, Bills, Kennedy, Leavitt, Welch, Willis and Wright. Only one of the seven voted against the machine amendments, Curtin.

The records of the seven favored, trip-taking Senators on railroad regulation measures are as follows:

For the Wright bill, against the Stetson bill; for the maximum rate, against the absolute rate - Leavitt, Welch, Willis, Wright, Bills, Kennedy - 6.