CHAPTER XXI. 1852. Clipper Ships-Enormous Taxation.-Purchase of the Jenny Lind Theatre by the Common Council. -Times and Transcript removes to San Francisco.-Fourth of July celebration.-Great scarcity of printing paper.-Duel between Hon. Edward Gilbert and General Denver.-Custom of Duelling. Funeral ceremonies on occasion of the death of Henry Clay. JUNE. It appears from records kept by the late harbor master, Captain King, that seventy-four vessels claiming and entitled to be called "clipper ships," and averaging rather more than 1000 tons burden, had arrived in the port of San Francisco during the last three years. These records commence with the well known brig Col. Fremont, in May, 1849, and include the Aramingo, which arrived in May, 1852. The average passage was one hundred and twenty-five days. Some of the fleet, however, made much more speedy voyages. The Flying Cloud, which arrived in August, 1851, performed the distance from New York in eighty-nine days. The Sword Fish, also from New York, arrived in February, 1852, after a passage of ninety days. The Surprise, arriving in March, 1851, the Sea Witch, in July, 1850, -both from New York,-and the Flying Fish, in February, 1852, from Boston, respectively accomplished the voyage in ninety-six, ninety-seven, and ninety-eight days. The "clipper ship" is virtually the creation of San Francisco. The necessity of bearing merchandise as speedily as possible to so distant a market, one too which was so liable to be suddenly overstocked by goods, early forced merchants and ship-builders interested in the California trade to invent new and superior models of vessels. Hence the modern clipper with her great length, sharp lines of entrance and clearance, and flat bottom. These magnificent vessels now perform the longest regular voyage known in commerce, running along both coasts of the Americas, in about four months; while the ordinary ships of older models used to take seven and eight months to accomplish the same distance. The contrast is very striking between the short, clumsy vessels, of a few hundred tons burden, which brought the early European navigators to the coast of California, and the large and beautifully lined marine palaces, often of two thousand tons, that are now continually gliding through the Golden Gate. These are like the white-winged masses of cloud that majestically soar upon the summer breeze. In another part of this work we have given an illustration of the galleon, or sea-going armed merchantman of Drake's day; here we lay before the reader a representation of one of the finest modern California traders, a clipper ship bound for San Francisco. While these noble vessels have revolutionized, in every maritime country, the model and style of longvoyage ships, they have also introduced a much happier marine nomenclature. The old-fashioned, humdrum Julias and Mary Anns, the Trusties and Actives are fast disappearing. The very names of our modern clippers have poetry and music in them, and convey a wonderful sense of swiftness. They confer even dignity on the dry details of the "marine reporter," where the simple words shine like golden particles in the Californian miner's sands. San Francisco was certainly a wealthy city, yet the amount of taxation laid upon it was enormous. We give here some statistics taken from official documents, showing the amount of cash which had been paid by the citizens during the year previous to this date. DIRECT TAXES. Amount collected from City Licenses, from June 1st, 1851, Amount collected from City Taxes, between said dates, $275,873 14 262,665 23 $538,538 37 Amount collected from State and County Taxes, from May 18th, 1851, to May 18th, 1852, $231,348 85 .... $769,887 22 Amount of direct taxes paid by the people of San Francisco during the past year, INDIRECT TAXES. Duties collected at the Custom House for six months, ending Duties collected for three months, ending March 31st, 1852, For the year ending June 30th, 1852, .. .... Amount in cash actually contributed by San Francisco for support of City, State, County and National Governments for one year, $1,012,128 94 450,041 50 484,056 81 $1,946,227 25 769,887 22 $2,716,114 47 These statistics show only the amount actually paid; but there were arrears of direct taxes which would certainly be recovered (since they were secured upon property), and which would swell the amount chargeable on the year to $1,053,773. Adding the last sum to the amount of custom-house duties, it will be seen that about three millions of dollars were drawn, as taxes, from San Francisco in one year. If the population be estimated at 30,000, this would show that the amount of local direct taxation was about $35 per head. In regard to the goods paying custom-house duties, it will be borne in mind that a fair proportion of the necessaries, and at least one-half of the luxuries used in the State were consumed in this city. If we estimate therefore the population of the former at quarter of a million, it may be supposed that the sum of, at least, $300,000 was actually con tributed in indirect taxation by the inhabitants of the latter. This is at the rate of $10 per head. Add this to the sum of $35 above mentioned; and it appears that the total amount of direct and indirect taxation for a single year upon each inhabitant, male or female, infant or adult, of San Francisco, was $45. This is an amount of taxation which few cities or countries can show. But besides these sums, the holders of city real estate were assessed in two-thirds of the expense of grading and planking the streets opposite their properties; while the general citizens voluntarily incurred a vast amount of additional expense, in the appointment of special police to guard particular localities, in the gratuitous services of firemen, in lighting, watering, cleansing and repairing the public streets, in opening drains and sewers, and in many other ways, the duty of attending to which naturally falls, in the cities of other lands, upon the municipal authorities. JUNE 4th. We have already had occasion to mention the unexpected manner in which the common council existing at this time managed to get into office. They never enjoyed the confidence of the people, by whom in reality they were not chosen. Perhaps on that very account, they were the more determined to neglect the public interests and attend solely to their own. Had Mayor Harris not continually been a thorn in their side, much additional mischief would have been perpetrated. Though this gentleman was on their ticket, and came into office in the same doubtful manner with themselves, there existed a marked difference in their public acts. Dr. Harris was a man of undoubted personal integrity, and possessed in a high degree the confidence and esteem of the citizens. By his care and faithfulness, the city was saved from many heavy burdens that would recklessly have been laid upon it by the common council of this year. One noted instance was his refusal to approve of the aldermen's ordinance accepting the terms of the act of the Legislature which relinquished the State claims to the water lots, upon the city recognizing and confirming certain of the old obnoxious "Cotton Grants." The purchase of the new Jenny Lind Theatre and Parker House for the purposes of a City Hall was another of the common council jobs which excited very much angry discussion at the time, and which afforded interesting and amusing "matter" for the newspapers-(the "Jenny Lind Swindle," or sometimes "Juggle," they facetiously called it),-during half a year. The old City Hall having been destroyed in the fire of 22d June, 1851, the various municipal officials were compelled to get business chambers where they could, for which very high rents had to be paid. As the different public offices were now located in separate parts of the town, much inconvenience was experienced. This arrangement could only be temporary. The rents, which were somewhere about forty thousand dollars per annum, formed a heavy tax upon the public; while ground could be bought and a proper building erected by the city itself for about four or five times that amount. Several desirable sites could be had in the town on moderate terms, and responsible contractors were ready to undertake the construction of the proposed building at fixed rates, which would certainly have reduced the total cost below two hundred thousand dollars. In these circumstances, the common council, for reasons, as the saying is, best known to themselves, and in spite of the indignant cries of the citizens, and the general remonstrances of the press, determined,-in conjunction with the board of supervisors of the county, who were to pay half the cost,-to purchase the Jenny Lind Theatre, and convert it into the proposed City Hall. The purchase-money of the building as it stood was to be $200,000; while to remove all the inside walls, leaving only the outer ones standing, and to build up the interior anew, properly fitted up for municipal purposes, was believed to involve the expenditure of nearly half as much more. At the same time, it was supposed that the building when so altered would be only a miserable structure at the best. An ordinance authorizing the purchase was passed by large majorities in both council boards, and sent to the mayor for approval, which was refused. Notwithstanding, the common council, on the 4th June, re-adopted the obnoxious ordinance, and passed it by a constitutional and almost unanimous vote. Meanwhile, the public wrath was growing very clamorous, the more so perhaps that it was impotent. On the evening of the 1st of June, one of the usual mass and indignation meetings was held on the plaza, where the proposed purchase was passionately de |