Crime and Saloons in San Francisco

14%

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D.C. · Dec 27, 1906

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 83, No. 52.

Read the full edition

Crime and Saloons in San Francisco

In a recent interview the governor of California said: “There seems to be a carnival of crime, and the most violent crime at that, in San Francisco.” Under the heading “Crimson Record of Two Months of Unchecked Crime in San Francisco,” the San Francisco Chronicle prints a list of fifty-five cases of robbery, assault, and murder. In an editorial in the same paper, which deals with the question of suppressing this outbreak of crime, we read:—
But nothing will be done so long as those who have the authority to give and enforce orders are men of low character, in habitual friendly intercourse with law-breakers, who shut their eyes to the villainies going on in the low class of saloons, and who freely grant liquor licenses to men known to seek the patronage of the criminal classes and believed to habitually share their gains.
In a sermon reported in the San Francisco Examiner dealing with the same conditions, a Methodist pastor said:—
During the months following directly after the fire when the saloons were closed, the reports of criminal acts were few and far between. Since the saloon traffic has resumed, not a day passes without its record of some act of violence. The police records speak for themselves. They show how great has been the increase in crime since the saloons opened.
It seems to be generally conceded by those who have written or spoken upon the matter, that San Francisco is under the control of a dangerous, crime-fostering element; and the recent indictments of officials there indicate that those distressing conditions are permitted in the interests of “graft.”
With these facts in mind, let our readers reread Sister White’s article in our issue of October 25, page 8, and observe the direct application of the principles there enunciated. Would it not seem that the continuance of such things invites a further visitation of judgment?