Los Angeles herald., 1891-02-11
wrDNrsDAY, rrBnuARv ii. 1891.
KINDLY EXPLAIN THIS.

The HERALD, without any lnCcnClOn
of doing any injury to Chief Glass, and
strictly with the view Of having the
right prevail in this municipality, has
called attention to the existence OF fan
tan and lottery games in Chinatown and
to the open and notorious prominence OF
great number Of very low order of
prostitutes on Alameda street, who
Haunt their nefarious business in fu II
sight of every incoming and outgoing
Southern Pacific train, to the great out
rage OF innocence and to the keen dis
gust of the more sophisticated protec-
tors of innocence. This journal sees no
reason to modify it's position in these
regards. The HERALD has said that
Chief Burns, assisted by Detective Glass,
once succeeded in abating this glaring
infamy; and that. through his efforts as
q subordinate, and the initiative of his
chief Burns, new and brighter era was
inaugurated for Los Angeles. The Times
of yesterday morning had labored de-
fence of Chief Glass, in which it asserted
that that gentleman was the best official
this city has ever had, and that
all kinds of vice have been abol-
ished instanter during his occupancy
of Office. If this were true we should be
only too happy to have it made appar.
cnt. The HERALD, equally with all
other Los Angeles people, is interested
in standing by an efficient officer. II he
is really the representative of the refor-
matory sentiment of the community,
this journal will be the first to say,
swell done, thou good and faithful SER
vant.''
But. in view of the open and fagrant
riot OF the bands on Alameda and Los
Angeles streets and the prevalence of
fan tan and the lottery in Chinatown,
we are not prepared to accept the Times
gilt-edged estimate of Chief Glass. 1t
calls him the best and most conscien-
tious chief we have ever had. This
would be very good if it were sup
ported by any evidence. The Times it.
self is authority for the statement that
there was perennial bribe-fund per-
colating towards the Office of the chief
of police as long as that official was
either Democrat or was Chief Burns.
Have all these pecuniary propositions
ceased just as soon as Chief Glass at
tanned power. Notwithstanding the fact
that the Chinese games run as freely as
of yore, and the Alameda-street enor-
nifty has attained even more pronounced
proportions than usual? We trow not.
Is Chief Glass really the glass of fash
ion and mould of form for all the
police chiefs of California? Let us see.
There is an ordinance closing the Chi
nese wash-houses at 12 O'Clock every
night. 1t is imperative. There is no
power in the chief to dispense with this
ordinance, or to allow any Mongol to
violate the law. In view of this fact we
present the following copy of permit
by the chief to violate the law, the orig
inal OF which we have in this Office:
.OBBIcE OF CHIEF OF POLICE,
CRY HALL, Tel. 80, P.O. Box 1862,
Los ANGELES, Sept. 27, 1897
'Chinaman, laundryman, $40 and 342
Buena Vista street:
Permission is hereby granted to above
Chinaman to work till O'Clock a. m. for
four days, beginning Sept. q, 1889.
Per order of
j. NJ. GLASS, Chief.
C. E. Wallin, clerk.
There is no authority for any such dis
pensation. 1t may be that it was issued
without any pecuniary consideration,
but it is supposed to beonly one of many
of the same sort.
Perhaps the Times will supply some
forgotten provision of our city statutes
that justified Chief Glass in departing
from the law.
We await it's answer.