The San Francisco call., 1898-02-02

What will the Examiner and its man aging editor do next? @...>
 The latest feat of the one acting for the other has been to swear out a war rant for the arrest of H. E.. Hunting ion on the charge of violating a city ordinance requiring all street cars to be equipped with safety guards, the alleged reason for the action being that the Examiner and its managing edltor were moved by the death of little Hulda Johnson to do something to en- force the law, to save lives and to pun ish the street-car magnates for the habitual practice of homicide. :.
 The alleged reason sounds lofty and noble, the action seems brave and self sacrificing. It is a pity that both are fakes. :..5...
 At the time the managing editor Of the Examiner swore out the warrant for the arrest of MT. Huntington he knew that Huntington was on his way East, thousands of miles out of reach. He knew that the ordinance which he charged MT. Huntington with violating had been amended so as to make 1t in operative at present, and, therefore, that it had not been violated either by Huntington or any one else. He knew that the officers of the railway eompa- nies are not responsible for the lack of safeguards on the cars inasmuch as the Board of Supervisors have. taken upon themselves the responsibility of determining what device shall be used for that purpose. -;~'-
 The managing editor of the Exami- ner knew all of these things, and he knew another thing: he knew that: he was playing a lying, braZen game. to make profit for himself and the fugi- tive Hearst out of the public sentiment aroused by the death of little Hu1da Johnson. - .:
 To toin money, to acquire a false re- pute for humanity of spirit out: of the general sorrow caused by the dreadful accident that deprived of life a: little child, all this elaborate fraud, this shameful false pretense, this lying show. of prosecution was planned out, arranged. put into practice and bla- Zoned to the world. :@*
 There. is no courage. displayed in swearing out a warrant. for the arrest of a man who is so far out of. town that he cannot be injured enough to move him to wrath nor strike back if he feels insulted. There is no intelli- genee displayed in charging a man with violating an: ordinance which is inop- .erative. There is no honor shown in accusing an absent: man of an offense of which it is known he is not. guilty. There is no .decencY in. trying to turn : the. bereavement of a stricken family into a source of pecuniary.+ profit There is no sense in playing before ar intelligent public a trick which is cer- tain to be. exposed next day :: But Wher did Hearst his mana ging editor: or any ' of the Hearstlings, ever show courage . {. T fr- ,". an occasion that promised them a profit by a display of hypocrisy, mean ness, fndecency and low cunning? ::
 The managing editor who devised this scheme opposing as public prose cutor on the. part of the. people and the :: owner of The Examiner who misem- ,. ploys him: as a. means of insulting GSar Francisco, are both of them charged :: before our courts with violations o1 law. Hearst is virtually a fugitive from justice. He dare not come to the lanC of his birth for fear of the law officers that await him.. His managing editol is under indictment for criminal sian der. This same editor has known be fore what it is to be jailed. The two are just the kind of men to raise rail ing accusations against others wher they have a sneaking belief they car escape the consequences.
 The game has been played for wha it is worth. It was blazoned forth witf a blare of lurid language under scare heads by The Examiner yesterday ant it is closed up and ended to-day. Th' sensational fake devised to make { profit out of the death of the poor little victim of the trolley has served but tt illustrate again the depths the de pravity of the demagogua organ. anC to cause intelligent peSf-.e to ask again What will The Examiner do next?
 The falseness of the bluff of the man, aging editor of the Examiner Is dis. closed by the following records show ing the original fender ordinance adopted May 6. 1895. and the subse quent order of July 29. 1895, which ren ders it imperative: