The San Francisco call., 1895-05-19

themselves had nothing better for substan-
tiation than idle gossip. In other words,
Henley told the Grand Jury that he had
been fooled by the Civic Federation.
Now the memb bers of that body take ex-
ception to Henley's statements.
1--WE did not send Henley before the
Grand jury" said George T. Gaden, "nor
did the Civic Federation ever propose to
furnish information in substanti tiation of
the charges which he had made against
the Supervisors.
''Some time ago he called our attention
to alleged irregular methods in the board,
relative to the granting of the Fillmore
street franchise to the Market-street Rail-
road Company. We told him to go ahead
and bring the matter to the attention Of
the Grand Jury, providing there was proof
of boodling.
at was a legal question, this franchise
matter, of which we knew nothing. He
said it is game of Doodle. and we an
swered him, then go ahead and we will in
dorse the proceeding. This we did, by
resolutions passed long after his charges
were laid before the Grand Jury"
The best evidence of the statements
made by Gaden is found in letter adj
dressed to Foreman Gagan of the Grand
Jury, on April II, as follows:
SAN FRANCISCO, CAL, April 25, 1895.
Hon. W. II. Gagan, Foreman Of the Grand
request of others and on my own behalf as well,
l desire to call your attention to the following
state of facts and the law thereon: Section 923
of the Penal Code of this State reads as follows
'If any member of Grand Jury knows or
has reason to believe that public offense
triable within the county has been committed,
he must declare the same to his fellow-jurors,
who must thereupon investigate the same"
On March %, 1895, there passed into effect
an act of the Legislature of this State providing
for the sale to the highest bidder of all fran
nhjSac q inU ha fto,,
tion of railroad, telegraph, and telephone
wires in the various cities and counties of the
State.
The power to sell said franchise by said act
Is vested in the Board of Supervisors or other
governing bodies, and the terms of SALE to-
gether with all antecedent steps leading up to
same, are clearly prescribed in said act.
The act further provides that before such
franchise is put up for sale the fact of the
application for the same shall be published in
one or more daily newspapers of the CITY and
county wherein such franchise OF privilege is
to be exercised.
The following requisites are plainly made
and indisputable in the notice to be publis he'd !:
First-The character of the franchise OF priv.
ilege proposed to be granted.
Second-The term of the continuance of the
same.
Third--If street railroad the route to be-
traversed.
Fourth--The time and place at which bids
will be received.
The act further provides in section that
If a member of the Board of Supervisors or
other governing bodies of any city OR county
shall by his vote violate or attempt to violate
the provisions of the act or any of them, he
shall be guilty of misdemeanor or malfeas-
ance in Office, and shall be deprived of his
Office after trial and conviction.
On April Is, 1895, the Board of Supervisors
OF this City and County, by vote of eight to
four, granted to the Market-street Railway
Company, its successors and assigns, for the
sum of $605, franchise to construct, Law
down and construct for a certain period Of
time, quite obscurely stated in the ordinance
the right over the route from connection with
line of the Market-street Railway Company
on Sixteenth street, at or near its intersection
with Church street. thence upon and along
Church street to Ridley street. and thence
upon and along Ridley street to Fillmore street,
TO connection with a line of the Market-street
Railway Company at Fillmore street, at or near
its intersection with Ridley street.
sell said franchise for the following reasons.
The published notice failed to comply with
the law in several particulars, and among
them the following:
gent form the term for which said franchise
was to be granted.
The said notice failed to state that the said
franchise would be sold to the highest bidder.
The said franchise was not published for ten
consecutive days as provided in section of
said law.
1t is not within the scope of this communica-
ton to attempt a conjecture as to why these
provisions of the law were violated by a ma jor-
ity of the board.
That they were violated suffices for the
present
The attention of your honorable bodv is ra-
spectfuliy invited to these facts and YOU are re-
quested 10 take whatever action you NAV deem
appropriate. Whatever Information have on
the subject will be furnished with pleasure.
and whenever my presence before the Grand
Jury may be required shall be glad to respond
% . SuA-A0As' 'u'' sAncIsl HENLEY.