The epic earthquake, of approximately 8.0 magnitude, that shook parts of San Francisco to the ground beginning at 5:13 a. m. on April 18, 1906, also helped break the political ham-merlock that the Ruef-Schmitz regime had on the city. These two happenings, connected
In some ways, marked major turning points in the city’s history. A municipal reform impulse, which had been building nationwide since the 1890s, had little to show for itself in San Francisco in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake and graft trials of public officials that began in October 1906. Yet the city would not return to business as usual and longer-term changes in governance were soon coming.
With its epicenter located on or near the ocean floor 2 miles west of San Francisco, the 1906 earthquake furnishes a striking natural example of how the Pacific has shaped - in this case dramatically so - California’s history. It was felt as far north as Coos Bay, Oregon, southward down to Los Angeles, and westward into central Nevada, underscoring the seismic reach of Greater California. Most of the shaking occurred along a 400-mile rupture of the San Andreas Fault. The destruction zone along that fault line was about 25 miles wide.
One of the great earthquakes in modern world history, the toll in lives and property was staggering. Recent research puts the death count at above 3,000 people. Property damage, in 1906 dollars, was in the range of $500 million. Afterward, much of the city looked like a smoldering, war-decimated refuse pile.
Most of the devastation was caused by the 50 separate fires ignited by the breaking of gas pipes. The earth’s violent movement also punctured water mains, making it extremely difficult to get sufficient water pressure to put out the fireball that burned much of the city.
Investigations, photographs, and eyewitness accounts attest to the extent that the calamity was seared into the consciousness of those surviving it. An official report prepared by UC Berkeley geology Professor Andrew C. Lawson in 1908 contained a description of the power of the quake near Point Reyes, about 30 miles north of San Francisco: “At Point Reyes Station at the head of Tomales Bay the 5:15 train for San Francisco was just ready. The conductor had just swung himself on when the train gave a great lurch to the east, followed by another to the west, which threw the whole train on its side.” In downtown San Francisco, one survivor, a certain G. A. Raymond, was staying in the city’s famous Palace Hotel when on the morning of the disaster he was “thrown out of bed.” Grabbing his clothing, he rushed from the hotel. “Outside I witnessed a sight I never want to see again. . . All around me buildings were rocking and flames shooting. As I ran people on all sides were crying, praying and calling for help. I thought the end of the world had come.”
Chinatown was leveled and many of its 14,000 inhabitants left homeless. However, for many there was a silver lining in the dark clouds of smoke: the birth records of the city’s Chinese perished in the flames, making it exceedingly difficult for immigration authorities to dispute the residents’ claims to American citizenship. Like the rest of the City by the Bay, Chinatown rebuilt itself into the nationally prominent enclave that it remains today.
As the city dug itself out of its physical and psychic ruins, it also began the process of digging itself out from the public scandals of the Ruef-Schmitz years. The city would rebuild itself structurally and politically. Fremont Older, editor of the San Francisco Bulletin, led the political housecleaning, laying plans even before the earthquake. The district attorney pledged his help, as did wealthy sugar heir Rudolph Spreckels. Even President Theodore Roosevelt assisted by arranging for federal prosecutor Francis J. Heney and investigator William J. Burns to play lead roles in preparing cases for the anticipated graft trials.
Figure 8.2 Much of the renowned Palace Hotel, like San Francisco itself, was reduced to rubble by the 1906 earthquake. Courtesy of the California History Room, California State Library, Sacramento, California.
Headway was made when the prosecutor trapped a supervisor into taking a staged bribe. In exchange for an offer of immunity, the supervisor divulged the names of his colleagues who had received bribes. Soon the other supervisors confessed, on being offered similar immunity. Going up the prosecutorial food chain, Heney offered protection from charges to Ruef, thereby obtaining a confession that implicated top corporate executives. Grand Jury indictments for bribery were then issued against the president of the United Railroads, Patrick Calhoun; against the chief counsel for that company, Tirey L. Ford; and against executives of various utility firms. Heney’s ultimate aim, implicit in this strategy, was to go to the top rung of the corporate influence ladder and indict and convict the Southern Pacific’s general counsel, William F. Herrin, and his superior, railroad president Edward H. Harriman.
The prosecutor’s aim was highly ambitious, which, under the circumstances, made convictions unlikely. His strategy depended on Ruef testifying in accordance with his confession. Unless the boss testified in court, under oath, that the corporate leaders paid him fees knowing that some of those monies would be disbursed to public officials, the cases against these defendants would fall apart. When the executives of United Railroads stood trial in 1907, Ruef, the prosecution’s star witness, refused to provide the testimony for which Heney
Had bargained. Ultimately, none of the executives were convicted. Exasperated, Heney withdrew Ruef’s immunity and prosecuted him in 1908 for trolley bribery. A prospective juror, angry that Heney had exposed him as a former convict, shot Heney in open court. Though surviving the resulting head wound, Heney was replaced by Hiram Johnson, who won a conviction of Ruef that landed the boss in San Quentin prison.
Figure 8.3 Abraham Ruef on steps of the Court House during graft trials. Ruef's personal transformation from idealist to big city "boss” greatly impacted San Francisco's politics. Courtesy of Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley.
In the end, no bribe-givers were convicted. Ruef was the only defendant who served prison time. Schmitz, whose conviction was overturned on a technicality, won election to the Board of Supervisors in 1917! In 1909 San Francisco’s business leaders, who had helped to initiate the graft investigation, became less supportive when the prosecution turned its sights in their direction. That year voters installed a new set of city officials who discontinued the trials. While Ruef’s career had ended, Johnson’s had just begun.
World History
