Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-08-04
PERSISTENT FALsIFIcArIoE.

The San Francisco Chronicle continues TO
allegc that the payment of the drainage
claims is "a steal" This iterated asser-
ton is, of course, intended to have its in
huence upon the Supreme Court. The
mistatements Of the Chronicle regarding
the claims have been so often set forth
that perseverance in reasserting them JUS
titles the conclusion that the Chronicle is
engaged in bit of willful lying for a
purpose. We are not disposed in this place
to go over all the ground and point out
the direct peryersions of the truth by that
paper, for it Will reassert them with con-
temptnous nonchalance. 1t operates upon
the alleged principle that a lie stuck to !"
IS as effective as the truth. This has, in
deed, been proved TO be so in the matter OF
running character, not infrequently, as the
Chronicle knows. 1t is quite labor lost to
appeal to the moral sense of the Chronicle
or to point out that it is inconceivable a
people will adopt Constitutions that will
prohibit them from doing justice TO each
other. In another column, however, in
the form of a side article, we have again
reviewed the drainage cases in way
that places them very clearly before both
laymen and lawyers. In this place we
may, however, take sufficient space to mem
ton that the claims sold by the original
owners to banks and brokers have. in the
main at least, been paid from the
Treasury. So they are out of the
the question, and the Chronicle is wasting
its powder, and sharp-shooting at dunn
mics. Those unpaid and now, or about
to be sued upon, are held by poor men who
were original contractors and laberers, and
but part of them did work upon the
brush dams, for other river reclamation
work was engaged in at points remote from
the slickens deposits. One of the gentle
men who let the contracts and knows that
the Chronicle falsifes when it SAYS the con-
tractors charged what they pleased, and
set price on their work such as men set
when they esteem the chance of getting
their pay extremely doubtful" is now
member Of the Supreme Court Commits
sion. He passed uponthe constitutionality
of the law; he inspected every contract
he considered the price charged or offered
for work III each contract, and consented
to it; he knows that what the CHronicle
alleges is fatty false and wholly untrue
he knows that the lowest bidders took the
work; that some of them in their competi-
tion bid below real values and lost money;
that some Of them, indeed, by their con-
tracts have been financially ruined; that
the constituted law adviser of the State
supported the constitutional view of the
act; as also did the Judiciary Committees
of both houses of two Legislatures
that not one of the Commissioners
had dollar Of interest in contract; that
each of them acted conscientiouslr, and
under the close rigor of official oath and
full appreciation of official responsibility.
Perhaps the Chronicle, if it really desires
to learn the truth, will avail itself of the
opportunity to interview" Hon. Niles
Searls on this matter. 1t will be entirely
proper for it to do so, since Mr.. Searls viii
not have any drainage case brought before
HIM in his judicial capacity.