"The System," As Uncovered by the San Francisco Graft ProsecutionHichborn, Franklin
History
"The System," As Uncovered by the San Francisco Graft Prosecution
Hichborn, Franklin
Political corruption -- California -- San Francisco; San Francisco (Calif.) -- Politics and government
"Yesterday," said the Chronicle the morning after the election,
"was a great day for San Francisco. It was the turn of the
tide. It was the beginning of the ascent to nobler ideals and
better days. The passions of the conflict will soon die away.
With an honest government assured, capital will not shun us but
seek us. And we can look back on the events of the last six
years as we remember a nightmare from which we awake to find
ourselves in security and peace."
"The indicted bribe-givers," said the Call, "may as well make
up their minds that there is no way of escape for them except
through trial and by the verdicts of the juries. The people
have spoken and they have said that the clean-up must be
thorough. The sweeping success of Langdon means that the
prosecution of the grafters will be pressed to its fitting
conclusion upon the facts and under the law. There need be no
delay now. Soon all the cases should be settled and another
chapter added to the history of San Francisco--a chapter in
which will have been written the means, the manner and the
fullness of our atonement for Schmitz-Ruef chapter just before
it, the vindication of the city's good name."
CHAPTER XXII.
HIGHER COURTS FREE SCHMITZ AND RUEF.
On January 8, 1908, the municipal officials elected with Mayor Taylor
assumed the duties of their office. That day, Ruef was taken from the
custody of the elisor and locked up in the county jail. In the jail with
him were Schmitz, convicted of the extortion charge to which Ruef had
pleaded guilty, and Glass, who had been convicted of bribery.
The following day, January 9, the Appellate Court, for the First
District, handed down a decision in the Schmitz extortion case, which,
later sustained by the Supreme Court, unlocked the prison doors not only
for Schmitz, but for Ruef also.[341]
The decision was the first serious setback in the graft cases that
District Attorney Langdon's office had received.
The prosecution had prevented Ruef seizing the District Attorney's
office; had defeated the efforts of the defense to have the indicting
Grand Jury declared an invalid body; had overcome the resistance of the
defendants to facing trial jurors; had, after meeting the clever
opposition of the best legal talent obtainable for money, forced trials
before juries and secured convictions; and finally, the prosecution had
met the defense before the larger jury of The People, and, at the polls,
had won again. But, with a stroke of the pen, the Appellate Court swept
aside the greater part of the accomplishment of fifteen-months struggle
against corruption. The court found the indictment under which Schmitz
had been convicted of extortion to be insufficient and ordered the
defendant to be discharged as to the indictment.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account