The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-06
Raw Work by a Reporter Of the
Yellow Paper.
Indignant DenalS and Protests Entered by Nearly ALI
Of Those Quoted as FaVOring
Dan Burns.

County made the same statement that
Mr.. Johnson did. Both were approached
by an Examiner representative and
asked to express a preference for Sena-
tor, but both declined to do 50. where
upon they were recorded by that paper
as admitting that they intended to
vote for the colonel"
Assemblyman Dibble of San Fran
cisco never at any time stated that he
intended to vote for the colonel.
Assemblyman Devote of San Fran
cisco was greatly incensed at having
been credited with admitting" that he
intended to vote for the colonel. He
never at any time made any such state
ment, in fact he has at no time ex-
pressed Senatorial preference.
Assemblyman Knowland of Alameda
County was in the poll as an admit
ting Burns man. Mr.. KnoWland never
made any such admission and has not
given expression as to his Senatorial
choice to any one.
Assemblyman Cargill of San Benito
was among those misrepresented. He
has as yet formed no preference.
Assemblyman Richard of San Fran
cisco stated that he had never declared
himself for any candidate for senator
but had repeatedly stated that he in
tended to vote for the caucus nominee
Not until he was called upon to vote
did he intend to announce his choice.
Assemblyman Kelsey of Santa Clara
County said he had never taken any
body into his confidence as TO whom ne
intended to vote for and declared he
was absolutely unpledged.
Assemblyman Arnerich of Santa
Clara denied absolutely that he had
ever informed anybody that he intended
to support Burns for Senator.
Assemblyman Cobb of San FRANCISCO
said: II have never declared to any
hodv whom If iS nv intention to SUD-
port for Senator"
Assemblyman Raub of Suffer County
never expressed himself on the Sena-
torial proposition.
Senator Hoey of San Francisco stated
that he had never given expression to
Senatorial preference and no Examiner
man ever pretended to question him IN
regard to the matter.
Senator Burnett of San Francisco de-
MED absolutely that he had ever at
any time told anybody whom it was
his intention to vote for. He was not
prepared to state yet the man OF his
choice.
And so it was all the way down the
| line. Various Senators and Assembly
men were published as having declared
for Grant, Bulla, Beale, Knight or Eel
ton. In some few instances it is true
that legislators have expressed prefer
enceS, but the poll was simply the COM
pilatton- Of a member OF the bszam1IFez~
staff, based upon no actual information
or data whatever, but made up as he
thought the vote might be upon the
first ballot, and printed for the purpose
of bolstering up the candidacy of the
man from Mexico.
But the publication of the fake failed
of its purpose. 1t has resulted in MAX
ing about twenty-five as angry states
men as can be found gathered in any
capital city in the United States Al
ready some of them are receiving teIe-
grams from their constituents asking if
they have been correctly placed by the
Examiner as announced supporters of
the candidacy of Mexican DAN
Those unhappy legislators have been
compelled to keep the wires hot with
explanations and as each telegram goes
out their anger increases and the Ian
guage they use in denouncing the Elk
aminer's fake Senatorial poll becomes
stronger and more expressive.