The record-union., 1893-03-31
AN ILLUSTRATIVE CASE.

During the past session of the Legis-
lature the San Francisco Bulletin con-
tinued to pour journalistic hot-shot into
all legislation proposed for the benefit of
Golden Gate Park, and, to make its work
more effective. declared that the meas
ures proposed were intended to turn that
splendid recreation ground over to the
Southern Pacific Company.
1t is surprising that a journal of
the intelligence of the Bulletin would
fall so low as to appeal to preiudices for
the accomplishment OF it's purpose, where
exposure would be so certain as in the
case under consideration, and where that
exposure would inflict such deep humili-
alton. OF all the specimens of fools any
country can boast, the greatest is the fool
journalist, who, having a spite against a
corporation, an institution or an indi-
vidual, adopts damnable iteration as a
policy concerning that particular corpora
ton or individual. Continuous hammer
ing of this species usually ceases to have
effect.
When anyone nowadays reads anything
in the Bulletin denouncing the Southern
Pacific Company, he turns from it in
disgust. A denunciation of that company
in the Bulletin is presumptive evidence
that the statement is not true, and this is
because the Bulletin has adopted the
policy of abusing that corporation. 1t
will, therefore, abuse without reason
quite as surely as with it. The fair
minded reader, therefore, can accept
nothing at the hands of the Bulletin as
true concerning the Southern Pacific
Company, and thus it is losing all power
TO injure that corporation. Whatever it
says in antagonism of the corporation is
accounted for, and the adequate answer to
any statement it makes is that the state
ment itself appeared in the Bulletin.
1t is matter of fact that the Bulletin
opposed all legislation relating to Golden
Gate Park. This was in pursuance of its
policy of opposition to all improvement.
1t opposed the construction of a ferry
landing at the foot of Market street, not
withstanding it was to be San Francisco
improvement, simply because one of the
ferries which would land passengers there
belonged to the Southern Pacific Com
pany. 1t might be said as general pro-
position, and be entirely true, that the
Bulletin has opposed every improvement
ever proposed for the city of San Fran
cisco. We defantly challenge it or its
friends to produce a single instance of
advocacy on the part of that paper of any
measure designed to improve the city. 1t
opposed the granting of a franchise for
the first street-railwav in that city, and if
it had had its way, the city would have
been far in the rear of all the cities of the
world with reference to street transporta-
ton. There is a large element in San
Francisco which owns no real estate. 1t
is simply sutler in the San Francisco
camp. 1t has no part with the permanent
citizenship of that city. 1t is there for
trade purposes, and intends to leave Just
ment is opposed to street improvement, to
the construction of City Halls, to the
building of schoolhouses, to the adorn-
ment of the city, to the improvement of
parks, to growth, progress, cleanliness,
decency and fair play, and the Bulletin is
its organ.
In opposing park legislation the Bul-
Ietin pretended to find justification in the
fact that the Hon. W. w. Stow was a
Park Commissioner. If there is a man
particularly well qualified for the dis
charge OF the duties of the office, that
man is Mr.. Stow and that Office is Park
Commissioner. No public officer serving
the State of California ever entered upon
the duties of his Office with more en-
thusiasm, with more energy, with more
executive force, with higher qualifica-
tons for the discharge of the duties of
the Office than did Mr.. Stow upon the
office of Park Commissioner. The work
he has accomplished is a monument to
the success of his administration. He is