The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-11-01
Hon. Patrick Reddy Addresses a
Democratic Meeting.

i1ONs Patrick KSuuN huuTCSScS a
Democratic Meeting.
Democrats turned out in force last night
at Odd Fellows Hall to hear Hon. Patrick
Reddy make a defense TO the charges
against James II. Budd. They filed the
aisles and the galleries and were enthus-
astic throughout, although Mr.. Reddy's
best friends were much disappointed at
his address.
He was introduced by r. p. Hammond
and was given three rousing cheers. He
began his address by asking the question
were the political opponents of the Demo-
cratic party DESTROYS OF good government.
1t was not questioned, be stated, that the
Republican party, In so far as it was rep
resented by the Sacramento convention
was bound hand and foot and under the
dictaton OF one man. Looking at the
proceedings of that convention. could that
convention give the people the govern
ment they wanted? Would they go to a
goats house for wool? Would they go to
a penitentlary for people to represent
them?
His first question was, do you want good
government? His secoud, would the peo-
pie look to Burns for it? Are the Repub-
llcans themselves satisfied with Mr..
Burns? He was in full control Of the Sac
ramento convention and George A knight
was his lieutenant aud had full charge for
him.
The speaker read from an account of the
proceedings of that convention the report
of the scene where Knight had raised him.
seis on the platform and called 10 the
n olsy delegates that they we're dogs. They
sat down, and no one was ever called to
account for that expression; no one was
ever called upon to retract. The means
employed in that convention spoke bad ~
for its nominees.
Mr.. Budd had called Spencer G. Willard
Kansas graSshOpper, and Mr.. Knight had
taken issue with him. Mr.. Knight said
Mr.. Willard was not grassh0pper and
had never been one in Kansas. The Issue
Joined on this point was something awful.
Then, said Mr.. Reddy. came the charges
ia the Evening Post against Badd, aud he
was there to refute them.
Taking up these charges the speaker
denied that Mr.. Budd was guardian of the
person of Nancy Neff. but produced pa
per TO show that he was only guardian of
her property. That he did not want that
property for himself. but was merely hold
ing it in trust for her brother George, to
whom he conveyed it without considera-
ton after her death. He produced the
deeds in this tran saciiOn and called upon his
audience to say il that did not clear him Of
that charge.
Proceeding. Mr.. Reddy. plainly not easy
with his subject and making very poor
nratorical effort, read from decisions of the
Oregon Supreme Court in the case to show
that there was not the slightest evidence of
forgery concerning the will of Nancy Neff.
After all this testimony. asked the
speaker, was the audience ready to give its
verdict ? Several in the audience cried
Yes J Not guilty." And loud cheers
followed. The speaker said he had not
expected the verdict would have been so
prompt, but he wanted them TO turn out at
the polls and make more binding one on
November next.
and was asked by numerous voices in the
audience 70 turn loose some of his SAL
casm. He apologiZed for the dry three
quarters of an hour given the audience BY
Hon. Pat Reddy, but SAID that the facts
presented showed undoubtedly that Mir.
Budd was not guilty of the crimes charged
He pointed out that charges of moral
delinquency had been made against James
@. Blaine and Grover Cleveland, and he
wanted to know if those who had made the
charges against Budd were as clean as
these. He dared the maker OF them to
stand up in the city of San Francisco for
the purpose of comparing his character
with that of jim Budd.
For an hour longer Mr.. Spencer held
forth in his owo inimitable way, telling
funny stories about peanut politics and
onions and kept his audience in good
HuDOT' ne Threw IN some very SARCASTIC
illusions TO Dan Burns, which seemed to
go with a relish.
Robert Ferral was the next speaker and
he hogan by compimenling Frank H.
Gould of Stockton on the way he had con-
Quoted the State campaign. Next he
stated that he was pretty sure the NEE ing
was not a. ?. a, for the reason that it
had had Pat and a Dennis addressing IT,
There was much applause and the sp aker
launched into II denuucati1D Of the urgati-
cation without GuGlifica tion. He denounced
them as fanatic and bigoted and called
upon the members OF all parties to pitch
in together and grind the association into
the dust.
There were three cheers for Jim Bud
at his conclusion and the meeting dis
persed.