|
In 1851 the price for one commodity became too high. That
commodity was lawlessness.
In two years the population of the city had vastly increased, until it now
numbered over thirty thousand inhabitants. At an equal or greater pace the
criminal and lawless elements had also increased. The confessedly criminal
immigrants were paroled convicts from Sydney and other criminal colonies. These
practiced men were augmented by the weak and desperate from other countries.
Mexico, especially, was strongly represented. At first few in numbers and
poverty-stricken in resources, these men acted merely as footpads, highwaymen,
and cheap crooks. As time went on, however, they gradually became more wealthy
and powerful, until they had established a sort of caste. They had not the
social importance of many of the "higher-ups" of 1856, but they were crude,
powerful, and in many cases wealthy. They were ably seconded by a class of
lawyers which then, and for some years later, infested the courts of California.
These men had made little success at law, or perhaps had been driven forth from
their native haunts because of evil practices. They played the game of law
exactly as the cheap criminal lawyer does today, but with the added advantage
that their activities were controlled neither by a proper public sentiment nor
by the usual discipline of better colleagues. Unhappily we are not yet far
enough removed from just this perversion to need further explanation of the
method. Indictments were fought for the reason that the murderer's name was
spelled wrong in one letter; because, while the accusation stated that the
murderer killed his victim with a pistol, it did not say that it was by the
discharge of said pistol; and so on. But patience could not endure forever. The
decent element of the community was forced at last to beat the rascals. Its
apparent indifference had been only preoccupation.
The immediate cause was the cynical and open criminal activity of an Englishman
named James Stuart. This man was a degenerate criminal of the worst type, who
came into a temporary glory through what he considered the happy circumstances
of the time. Arrested for one of his crimes, he seemed to anticipate the usual
very good prospects of escaping all penalties. There had been dozens of exactly
similar incidents, but this one proved to be the spark to ignite a long
gathering pile of kindling. One hundred and eighty-four of the wealthiest and
most prominent men of the city formed themselves into a secret Committee of
Vigilance. As is usual when anything of importance is to be done, the busiest
men of the community were summoned and put to work. Strangely enough, the first
trial under this Committee of Vigilance resulted also in a divided jury. The mob
of eight thousand or more people who had gathered to see justice done by others
than the appointed court finally though grumblingly acquiesced. The prisoners
were turned over to the regular authorities, and were eventually convicted and
sentenced.
So far from being warned by this popular demonstration, the criminal offenders
grew bolder than ever. The second great fire, in May, 1851, was commonly
believed to be the work of incendiaries. Patience ceased to be a virtue. The
time for resolute repression of crime had arrived. In June the Vigilance
Committee was formally organized. Our old and picturesque friend Sam Brannan was
deeply concerned. In matters of initiative for the public good, especially where
a limelight was concealed in the wing, Brannan was an able and efficient
citizen. Headquarters were chosen and a formal organization was perfected. The
Monumental Fire Engine Company bell was to be tolled as a summons for the
Committee to meet.
Even before the first meeting had adjourned, this signal was given. A certain
John Jenkins had robbed a safe and was caught after a long and spectacular
pursuit. Jenkins was an Australian convict and was known to numerous people as
an old offender in many ways. He was therefore typical of the exact thing the
Vigilance Committee had been formed to prevent. By eleven o'clock the trial,
which was conducted with due decorum and formality, was over. Jenkins was
adjudged guilty. There was no disorder either before or after Jenkins's trial.
Throughout the trial and subsequent proceedings Jenkins's manner was unafraid
and arrogant. He fully expected not only that the nerve of the Committee would
give out, but that at any moment he would be rescued. It must be remembered that
the sixty or seventy men in charge were known as peaceful unwarlike merchants,
and that against them were arrayed all the belligerent swashbucklers of the
town. While the trial was going on, the Committee was informed by its officers
outside that already the roughest characters throughout the city had been told
of the organization, and were gathering for rescue. The prisoner insulted his
captors, still unconvinced that they meant business; then he demanded a
clergyman, who prayed for three-quarters of an hour straight, until Mr. Ryckman,
hearing of the gathering for rescue, no longer contained himself. Said he: "Mr.
Minister, you have now prayed three-quarters of an hour. I want you to bring
this prayer business to a halt. I am going to hang this man in fifteen minutes."
The Committee itself was by no means sure at all times. Bancroft tells us that
"one time during the proceedings there appeared some faltering on the part of
the judges, or rather a hesitancy to take the lead in assuming responsibility
and braving what might be subsequent odium. It was one thing for a half-drunken
rabble to take the life of a fellow man, but quite another thing for staid
church-going men of business to do it. Then it was that William A. Howard, after
watching the proceedings for a few moments, rose, and laying his revolver on the
table looked over the assembly. Then with a slow enunciation he said,
'Gentlemen, as I understand it, we are going to hang somebody.' There was no
more halting."
While these things were going on, Sam Brannan was sent out to communicate to the
immense crowd the Committee's decision. He was instructed by Ryckman, "Sam, you
go out and harangue the crowd while we make ready to move." Brannan was an ideal
man for just such a purpose. He was of an engaging personality, of coarse fiber,
possessed of a keen sense of humor, a complete knowledge of crowd psychology,
and a command of ribald invective that carried far. He spoke for some time, and
at the conclusion boldly asked the crowd whether or not the Committee's action
met with its approval. The response was naturally very much mixed, but like a
true politician Sam took the result he wanted. They found the lovers of order
had already procured for them two ropes, and had gathered into some sort of
coherence. The procession marched to the Plaza where Jenkins was duly hanged.
The lawless element gathered at the street corners, and at least one abortive
attempt at rescue was started. But promptness of action combined with the
uncertainty of the situation carried the Committee successfully through. The
coroner's jury next day brought in a verdict that the deceased "came to his
death on the part of an association styling themselves a Committee on Vigilance,
of whom the following members are implicated." And then followed nine names. The
Committee immediately countered by publishing its roster of one hundred and
eighty names in full.
The organization that was immediately perfected was complete and interesting.
This was an association that was banded together and close-knit, and not merely
a loose body of citizens. It had headquarters, company organizations, police,
equipment, laws of its own, and a regular routine for handling the cases brought
before it. Its police force was large and active. Had the Vigilance movement in
California begun and ended with the Committee of 1851, it would be not only
necessary but most interesting to follow its activities in detail. But, as it
was only the forerunner and trail-blazer for the greater activities of 1856, we
must save our space and attention for the latter. Suffice it to say that, with
only nominal interference from the law, the first Committee hanged four people
and banished a great many more for the good of their country. Fifty executions
in the ordinary way would have had little effect on the excited populace of the
time; but in the peculiar circumstances these four deaths accomplished a moral
regeneration. This revival of public conscience could not last long, to be sure,
but the worst criminals were, at least for the time being, cowed.
Spasmodic efforts toward coherence were made by the criminals, but these
attempts all proved abortive. Inflammatory circulars and newspaper articles,
small gatherings, hidden threats, were all freely indulged in. At one time a
rescue of two prisoners was accomplished, but the Monumental bell called
together a determined band of men who had no great difficulty in reclaiming
their own. The Governor of the State, secretly in sympathy with the purposes of
the Committee, was satisfied to issue a formal proclamation.
It must be repeated that, were it not for the later larger movement of 1856,
this Vigilance Committee would merit more extended notice. It gave a lead,
however, and a framework on which the Vigilance Committee of 1856 was built. It
proved that the better citizens, if aroused, could take matters into their own
hands. But the opposing forces of 1851 were very different from those of five
years later. And the transition from the criminal of 1851 to the criminal of
1856 is the history of San Francisco between those two dates.
Back to: Forty Niners |
|
|
|
California Counties |
|
|
|
Research, Books and Articles |
|
|
|
Other Genealogy Resources |
|
|
|
Report a Broken Link
Contact Us
Please let us know if one of our links don't work!! |
|