The San Francisco call., 1898-10-26
Some Queries That Are of
 Interest to Voters.


 ed in the specifications it Is because the champions of these particular paVements did not have faith enough in their lasting qualities to accept the offer Of the Street Committee to put down eAPeIl- mental blocks at their own expense ou evidently have been more successIuI tllf'ii the board in succeeding in having an eN perimental block of wooden pavement laid.
 The public is too familiar with the Iall- ure of wooden block paving in thls city a failure which has cost the taxpayers thousands upon thousands Of oollars-'o hazard any more experiments in this me. It might be well to state that asphalt pavements and bitumihous rock pave ments are the same thing-atter they are laid. There Is a difference, however Tn the preparation before the pavement IS laid Asphalt Is artificial1y mixed, Where- as bituminous sand rock is laid on the street in the same state that it comes from the hand of nature. In your speech you state with reference to Keeping the streets clean, I believe you pledged your nominees to look carefully after that. The streets have been carefully looked after Then too, the streets have been much improved during the last two years" You might have added. if you cared to enlighten the convention, that, with the exception Of the writer, the nominees of the Non-Partisan party vot- ed against every proposition for the cleaning of streets; the repaving of Mar let street. and the award of contracts for the repair of bituminous rock streets this latter contract effecting a saving of many thousands of dollars to the city. and being the first systematic attempt at repairing the bituminous rock streets yet made.
 Tt is understood that there is com bination in the Board of Supervisors in the interest of that particular pavement (bituminous rock), and that all other pavements, no matter how meritorious, including California asphalt pavements, are excluded. This California asphalt was offered when Market street was about to be paved at a price very little greater than that asked for bitumen.'
 For the Information of your convention I submit the figures which, in the hurry and hustle of the moment, l presume you omitted:
 City Street Improvement Company, for bituminous rock, $15,000.
 Alcatraz Asphalt Paving Company, for asphalt, $26, ,241 30
 A difference of $11 241 30, or nearly 75 per cent in favor of bituminous rock. It is rather fortunate for the city that an un- N-AANSN @4A --> favor of asphalt pavements.
 'I have had some definite information upon the subject of this understanding in the board, but it is of such character that I cannot state as facts what l have learned"
 I would suggest that your public ut terances during this campaign scarcely tustifes the public in expecting you to state facts.
 do aIc I all that has occurred during the adminis- tration that will be of interest, except the matter of unseating the Board of Super visors. As to that, I think the chairman of your convention knows even more about it than r.
 I do not wonder at your endeavoring to drag in the chairman of the conven- tion or anybody else to share with you the "honors" of that disgraceful affair.
 The despicable part you took in that matter is of public record, so need not be dwelt on further. l can fully under stand your protest at the delay of the Supreme Court in rendering a decision in this case and am pained to observe the obtuseness of the press and people on your position in this matter. If the pub lie will go back to the period of the dis cussion of the water question" 1t will remember that you took very decided grounds in advising the board that so long as the investigation was commenced in February it might be prolonged to the end of June. This opinion of yours seems to have been concurred in by the Supreme Court, and it is only human na- ture to expect that you should be eager to have your opinion finally confirmed by the highest tribunal of tie State. I think however, you were injudicous in e in l{N ner. Had you telephoned the court with a polite but firm request-mentioning your name of course-to rush" the de- cision, there Is no question in my mind that you would have met with equal if not greater success than you did by your sandlot appeal
 was somewhat disappointed at the ac- count you gave of your stewardship" to the Democrats nominating convention. really thought your Heftiness would de- scend from the lofty perch you occupied while addressing the Non-Partisan party, but you maintained the same dizzy alti- tude before the Democratic convention thought, for instance, that instead of abusing every official, both elected and appointed you might have entertained the convention with what you yourself had done during the term of your busi- ness administration. You might have dis pelled the tradition which still fingers in the Tax Collectors office of that visit of yours, and of the embarrassment which followed when you discovered that you had wandered into a strange place and of your subsequent apologies for your intrusion. You could have stated the re- suits of your visits to the various insti- tions over which you are supposed to extend your watchful care-for instance the engine houses, jails and quasi public institutions. When the Finance Commit tee of the Board of Supervisors last paid a visit to the public institutions it was pleased to observe that although you had not up to that time paid them visit, yet with rare thoughtfulness you sent your portrait to one of the reformatories for the adornment of the reception room. While the sending of the portrait might not conform to the letter of the law, which requires your personal investiga- ton of all public and quasi public insti- tutions, still I do not think there are any who are so censorious as to find fault with your action in this particular in- stance.
 You failed to make any mention of the guessing contest you so successfully car ried out in the Treasurer's office, your