Sacramento daily record-union., 1890-09-07

informed his friends that Pond would re-
ceive the support of the San Francisco
delegation on the second ballot.
A visitor to the San Jose Convention
would have observed, indeed, curious
spectacle. He would have seen the San
Francisco delegation, numbering one hun
dred and forty four, sitting in rectangular
and compact form on the floor of the Con-
vention He would have seen window
recess on the fanko of the delegation, which
recess was petitiened off from the main
floor of the Convention by suitable
screen. Behind that screen he would have
observed Christopher A. Buckley, who sent
his orders to the leader of the delegation
on the floor. Mr.. George r. B. Hayes, to cast
so many votes for John Doe, and so many
! for Richard Roe, without ever once con-
sulting any member of the delegation. He
| would have observed E. B. Pond present,
witnessing this spectacle of absolutism on
the part of his particular friend and ally,
Mr.. Christopher A. Buckley. There were
in that delegation lawyers, doctors, Judges
and business men, but a spokesman of the
delegation arose on the floor whenever a
name was announced throughout the pro-
ceedings, and announced given number
of votes for each candidate before the Con-
vention He was instructed to do this by
| the autocrat behind the screen. On one
occasion only was the roll called. That
was demanded by a single delegate from
the city of San Francisco. He was pulled
down by three or four persons sitting
around him. Clay Taylor, of Redding,
was in the chair, and observing the action,
said that if the gentleman wished the roll
of the San Francisco delegation called, it
was his right, and it was called; that was
the only instance The visitor to the San
Jose Convention would, therefore, have OBJ
served the very curious spectacle of Buck
ley determined to nominate Pond, having
from the very outset determined to nomi-
nate Pond, having entered into relations
with Pond, whereby it was plainly under
stood by them that Pond was to receive
the nomination, while attempting to pro-
duce the appearance of his own defeat.
Nor was that spectacle any more re-
markable than the one presented by the
Examiner In the editorial under considera-
ton. The Examiner declares by that edi-
| torial that it wishes the State to under
stand that Mr.. Buckley did not nominate
Pond. 1t realizes that if the real truth in
| this matter were known and admitted Mr.
Pond would stand no chance whatever Of
success. The admission of the underlying
truth in this case would identify Pond
with the dishonest extravaganza of the last
Legislature, with the venal and corrupt
practices of Buckleyism in San Francisco,
with jury tampering, ballot-box stufing,
and all other species of bad municipal
government. The Examiner knows that
| tDt UclMccu OUu anu
ley in the city of San Francisco is that of
perfect understanding-the relation be-
tween man and master, withBuckley in the
role of master 1t, therefore, wishes the
State to understand that Mr.. Pond had
votes ''tricllle" in for him from Siskiyou,
from Humboldt, Placer and other places.
The 144 delegates from San Francisco sat
on the floor of that Convention and were
moved like marionettes by the boss, and in
due time and according to prior arrange
ment, that IA votes was cast for E. B.
Pond, thus securing his nomination.
1t was the hope of the boss that enough
votes would "trickle" in from Siskiyou,
from Placer, Fresno, ETC., to bring Ponds
strength up to within forty or fifty of a
nomination. The forty or fifty would then
be readily supplied, and the appearance of
Buckley defeat would be produced.
Then Buckley, in concealment behind the
candidate, could repeat in the next Legis-
lature what he accomplished in the last.
There is, however, most perfect test as to
the relations of these parties, and to this
test we now challenge the Democratic can
didate for Governor. He, better than any
one else, knows the corrupting influence OF
bossism in San Francisco. He, better
than any man in the State, knows the
methods adopted to control Courts and
juries, defeat the will of the people at the
primaries the interference with Republi-
can primaries by Democratic bosses, the
combinations between the Republican and
the Democratic boss in the distribution Of
patronage, the scaling down of salaries in
the interest of bossism, the receipt by
Buckley of percentages from public Off
GERS; he knows all these things thoroughly
we'll Now, in the first speech he makes
at the opening of his campaign, let him
declare distinctly his direct opposition to
the rule and reign of Christopher A.
Buckley, and his determination to make it
the rule and policy of his administration
to overthrow Buckleyism in the State, and,
to the extent of his power and influence
as Governor, to overthrow Buckley in the
control of municipal affairs in San Fran
cisco. In short. let him specifically vindi-
cate himself of the charge Of being in
Buckley's interest by repudiating Buckley
in such unequivocal and unmistakable
terms that the world will know whom he
means and what he means by what he
SAYS. The Examiner has done this for him
in a measure The Examiners editorial,
if interpreted into plain English, would
run about as follows:
| Voters of California-Mr. Pond is not in sym
pathy with Christopher A. Buckley. Mr.. Pond
is an enemy of Mr.. Buckley. The proof of this
Ia that votes 'triekled" in to him from siskiyou,
Placer and Fresno. He was not nominated by
any trick of boSsism, but by "trickling' OF
votes from the rural districts He is the great
North American "trickle" candidate aud Buck
| ley is bitterly hostile to him. OF course. we
expect Buckley to use his political sagacity, his
manipulating faculty, his organizing capacity,
his money snd all other Influences he possesses
1 4. .s~sa