The San Francisco call., 1908-08-30
|M'NAB BSCORFSB BELL
| ON GRAFT QUESTION
Deposed Bourbon Boss Declares
Napa Man Refused to Oppose
Rnef and Schmitz
Leader of Reformed Democracy
Is Denounced as Party Jonah
and Coward

That Theodore A. Bell refused to
take a manly stand against Ruef,
Schmitz and the San Francisco grafters
in 1906 and that Belps cowardice was
responsible for his defeat in San Fran
cisco and the election of Governor
James n. Gillett are the charges laid
at the door Of the Napa leader of
| reformed" democracy by Gavin Nc
Nab, deposed boss of the bourbons
of California.
In a statement made yesterday Nc
Nab asserted that he and other par
ty leaders endeavored to get a denun-
citation OF Ruef. Schmitz and graft
from Bell at his San Francisco meet
ings, but they failed signally The ef-
forts made to get a Fortnight public
declaration from Ben were described
| by McNab in detail and in substantial
ton OF his charges that Bell refused
to take issue with the grafters, Nc
Nab produced a letter from Bell, in
which the latter excused his position
on the ground that the graft situation
in San Francisco could not be made a
state issue.
McNab scored the Napa man in
characteristic epigrams as a carpet
bagging political Messiah, an habitual
| loser, party Jonah and a coward
Here is McNab's latest contribution
to the bourbon war of words:
STATEMENT BY McNAB
"On the day of the primary 1 said
I would not be at the state conyen-
tion. I will not be there.
IF absence will decrease party fac
tionalism, 1 can best serve the party
by remaining away.
What the party needs is peace, unity
and hard work. The party cannot
| fight itself and do much for Bryan.
Although the convention might miss
a great leader like Bells it will not
mind private in the ranks not com
| ing.
''oh. yes, have read Bells story
OF how sorry he was that the people
| rejected him at the primary when he
! had offered himself as a political Mes
siah from Napa carrying the millen-
MUM in carpet bag.
Bell should be used to these re-
! Jections. When he had two nomina-
tions for governor, the democratic and
labor, he received from the people of
San Francisco the lowest vote ever
given democratic nominee for that
office, and ran barely more than even
with man who had no party nomi-
nation. And in Alameda county which
was then largely peopled by San Fran
! ciscans, he was not only badly beaten
| by Gillett, but was behind a third
candidate 1t is painful to contem-
plate what his position might have
been had there been more than three
men running.
COMPARES BUDD AND LANE
"Budd. with one nomination. carried
San Francisco by 1900 and was
elected. Lane, with one nomination.
carried this city by 5000, and had the
votes cast for him in the interior been
counted he would have been elected.
I'm the recent primary the people
merely expressed again their lack of
confidence in Bell and his associates.
/, This was most emphatic in the big
labor districts. the thirty first, thirty
second and thirty-third, where that
ticket was beaten by a vote of two
to one.
''One would suppose that such rec
ord would inspire sentiments of mod
esty and not a disposition to strut
Neither the public nor the party
can be edited or benefited by Belis
personal opinion of McNab.. or by Nc
Nab's personal opinion of Bell
But the public and the party have
a right to know the reason for Bells
defeat for governor, especially as the
causes point a moral to all men in
public life
BELL was defeated for governor be-
cause he refused to publicly declare
himself in a bold, manly, satisfying
manner on graft in San Francisco
During his candidacy civic affairs
!