The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-08-23
SOME FACTS IN THE CASE.

The Chronicle makes a feeble attempt to
evade the responsibility for the loss to Cali
fornia of the Horticultural Bureau of the
Worlds Fair. Although the people of this
State are familiar with the facts, we repeat
them as nearly as possible in the order ia
which they occurred. In the beginning was
the appointment of N. H. de Young as one
of the National Commissioners for Califor-
MIA by the late Governor Waterman. When
the California Commissioners went on to
Chicago there was substantial agreement
among them to secure if possible the APP
pointment Of General Chapman as Chief of
the Horticultural Bureau. The first intima-
ton that came to this Coast that Chapman
was not being supported by the California
Commissioners was that William Forsyth,
another National Commissioner, had de-
clared for Maxwell. Soon after, De Young,
under pretense of securing harmony, ae-
cepted Forsyth's man. Maxwell was nomi-
mated and confirmed by the National Board
of Control. Protests against his confrma-
ton on the ground of notorious deficiency
In the qualifications essential to the per-
formance of the duties of the Office induced
the Chicago Directory to reject him. Gen
eral Chapman was then nominated, con-
frmed by the Directory, but rejected by the
National Board Of Control. De Young
then induced DirectOI-General Davis to
nominate Forsyth. but the fact that Forsyth
was not citizen led to his rejection. Cali
fornia then made united effort to secure
the Office for De Barth Shorb. The State
Commission and all the home boards es-
pecially interested Endorsed Shorb. About
the only person who did not indorse Shorb
was De Young, who resented the re-
nf
cHronicle of the 22d inst. says: :" 1t is very
true that Mr.. de Young, in his capacity as
member of the National Commission, has
not made any effort to secure the place for
Mr.. Shorb, and for this there is abundant
reason. In the first place. the comments
made by DiTect0r-GeneIal Davis upon Mr..
ShOrb would be enough to deter any one, it
might DE supposed, from making any very
strenuous efforts in his (Shorb's) behalf !;
and, in the second place, the presentation of
the name OF a Californian has been the
signal for such an outflow of calumny and
obloquy, that Mr.. de Young may very
reasonably think that he is not called upon
TO offer himself as a persistent target for
SANDER and abuse"
The Chronicle seems to forget that Mr. de
Young was not urged as Chief of the H0rti-
cultural Bureau. How could the nemina-
ton of Mr.. Shorb subject De Young to
SANDER and abuse? No one has asked De
Young to nominate Shorb. After having
dominated Maxwell and Forsyth, the public
were quite willing 10 see him retire from the
nominating business. All the public asked
of him was to maintain the silence which
so well became him. The Chronicle charges
that objections of a serious nature have
been preferred against Shorb in Los An
geles. his own town. What are these
charges? When Maxwell was nominated,
the objections TO him were specified. When
Forsyth was nominated like course was
pursued. But no one knows why General
Chapman was not confirmed, nor the nature
of charges against Shorb.