Norton Biographer William Drury Missed the Boat on Where the San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin Was Located — And Who Was the Editor — in 1859

IN SEPTEMBER 2019, The Emperor Norton Trust — then still known as The Emperor’s Bridge Campaign — created a kind of pop-up shrine to Emperor Norton.

On September 17th, Empire Day, we placed the shrine across Clay Street from Transamerica Redwood Park — on the north side of Clay, between Montgomery and Sansome, just east of Leidesdorff — to help passersby remember and commemorate the 160th anniversary of Joshua Norton’s declaration of himself as Emperor Norton on 17 September 1859.

It was on this date, 17 September 1859, that Joshua Norton hand-delivered his original Proclamation to the office of the San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin. We placed the shrine where we did, because we believed that the Bulletin’s office at the time was at 517 Clay Street — and because the Clay Street spot we chose was at, or near, the former site of the building at 517.

It appears that Emperor Norton biographer William Drury was the first to try to pin the “Proclamation event” to a specific address. In his oft-cited Norton I: Emperor of the United States (Dodd Mead, 1986) — which many consider to be The Book on the subject — Drury wrote that it was to 517 Clay that Joshua Norton came with a special delivery for the editor of the Bulletin:

**Excerpt from William Drury’s *Norton I: Emperor of the United States* (Dodd, Mead, 1986)**, p. 56. Collection of the Boston Public Library. Source: Internet Archive (available for online checkout)

We based our belief on Drury’s account — but, as it turns out: Drury was wrong.

To wit: There WAS no “517 Clay Street” in September 1859.

The “517” address did not appear until 1861, when San Francisco recalibrated its address numbering system. Prior to this, businesses in the building that later was designated with the addresses 517 and 519 Clay Street were listed at 133 and 135.

For example, here’s the advertisement for Alexander Buswell’s bookbindery that ran in Langley’s city directory for 1860:

And the ad that ran for the business in Langley’s directory for 1861:

The Evening Bulletin did eventually expand into “editorial rooms” at 517 Clay Street in 1861 — something that first was reflected in Langley’s San Francisco directory for that year:

But, the Bulletin in 1861 retained its existing main office, newly numbered 620 Montgomery — at the southeast corner of Montgomery and Merchant Streets.

The Bulletin’s Montgomery Street office — the only office the paper had in 1859 — is where Joshua Norton brought his original Proclamation on the morning of 17 September 1859.

Here’s a familiar 1856 photograph by George R. Fardon that shows the street-level relationship between the then-new Montgomery Block, completed in 1853, and the Evening Bulletin office. The view north on Montgomery shows the Montgomery Block on the northeast corner of Montgomery and Merchant Streets; the Bulletin on the southeast corner; and the narrow lane of Merchant Street between them.

The Bulletin — which recently had published its inaugural issue on 8 October 1855 — is the tiny one-story brick building across Merchant from the Montgomery Block. This is where Joshua Norton paid his visit in September in 1859 (click to enlarge).

**Montgomery Block, Montgomery Street, San Francisco, c. 1856.** Original photograph by George R. Fardon (1807–1886). Labeling: John Lumea. Photograph source: Getty

The following 1938 aerial view provides better context. The orientation of the photograph has east at the top, and the street configuration is as it was in 1859. The shaded building is the Montgomery Block, which had another 21 years to go; it was demolished in 1959.

The north-south street along the west (bottom) side of the Montgomery Block is Montgomery. Parallel to, and east of, Montgomery — visible at the top of the photo — is Sansome Street. The three parallel east-west streets are — from north to south (left to right) — Washington, Merchant and Clay.

Notice that, in crossing Montgomery Street from Merchant Street, Merchant was slightly offset.

In 1859, the Bulletin, remember, was located at the southeast corner of Montgomery and Merchant — across Merchant Street from the Montgomery Block (click to enlarge).

When the Transamerica pyramid was constructed between 1969 and 1972, most of Merchant Street between Montgomery and Sansome was demapped, with the pyramid built over the former Merchant Street street bed.

The resulting superblock eliminated the southeast corner of Montgomery and Merchant.

This aerial photograph, taken as construction of the Transmerica pyramid was nearing completion in May 1972, provides a good sense of the new — and current — situation (click to enlarge):

In order to get an accurate sense, today, of where the Daily Evening Bulletin office was in 1859, stand on the southwest corner of Montgomery and Merchant, look directly across Montgomery, and shift your view ever so slightly to the left.

Put another way: On 17 September 1859, Joshua Norton declared himself Emperor on a spot that — 113 years later — would be at the front door of the Transamerica pyramid.

Here, towards the bottom right corner of this photograph, was the spot (click to enlarge).

**Montgomery Block (left) and San Francisco *Daily Evening Bulletin* office, with banner over Merchant Street mourning the death of Bulletin editor James King of William, 22 May 1856.** Source: OpenSFHistory / wnp71.0041

Note the “Daily Evening Bulletin” sign on the front of the office in this photo from 22 May 1856. The banner over Merchant Street — put up by nearby Howard Fire Company No. 3 — expresses the righteous sorrow of those still reeling from the May 14th assassination-in broad-daylight of the Bulletin’s inaugural editor James King of William (1820–1856) by James Casey — followed by King’s death on the 20th.

Both King’s funeral and the hanging of Casey by the Second Vigilance Committee took place on the date of this photograph.

Three months later, Joshua Norton declared bankruptcy. And, three years after that, 17 September 1859 was another day of mourning in San Francisco. The day before, the 16th, California U.S. Senator David Broderick had died from a gunshot wound suffered in a duel with former California Supreme Court Chief Justice David Terry three days earlier.

On the morning of the 17th, Joshua appeared at this very door to declare a new Empire.

Was the Transamerica Corporation aware of all of this when it selected the former site of the Daily Evening Bulletin as part of the site for its new tower, a tower that now — 50 years later — is regarded as one of the most significant modern symbols of San Francisco?

:: :: ::

A SECOND area where Norton biographer William Drury got out over his skis: his claim that, when Joshua Norton went to the Daily Evening Bulletin in September 1859, he handed his original Proclamation to George Kenyon Fitch (1826–1906) — and that Fitch was the paper’s editor at the time.

In the passage from Drury that I include at the top of this article, Drury wrote that “Joshua Abraham Norton climbed the stairs of No. 517 Clay Street to George K. Fitch’s office, the fervor and fever of madness bright as the light in his eyes.”

A couple of paragraphs earlier, Drury had named Fitch as the editor of the Bulletin.

Throughout his book, Drury positions Fitch as having the top editorial job at the Bulletin during Emperor Norton’s reign, 1859–1880, and as being the final arbiter of the paper’s content during this period. Indeed, Drury’s title for the chapter where he introduces Fitch is “Fitch the Kingmaker” — further reinforcing the idea that Fitch was the one who made the call to run Joshua Norton’s original Proclamation.

Here’s Fitch in the late 1860s:

**George Kenyon Fitch (1826–1906)**, partner and later editor of the San Francisco *Daily Evening Bulletin*, in the late 1860s. In “George Kenyon Fitch: Pioneer California Journalist,” California Historical Society *Quarterly*, V20 N4, December 1941. Source: University of California Press

George Fitch did become the de facto editor of the Daily Evening Bulletin in the early 1860s. But, he was not yet serving in this role on 17 September 1859.

As it happens, 1859 was a moment of transition in the editorial ranks of the Bulletin. To understand why, it helps to rewind for a bit. There are some weeds here, so bear with me.

On 15 May 1856, the paper had published a note of thanks from Thomas Sim King (1823–1911), whose brother — the paper’s editor, James King of William — still was teetering between life and death after being shot by James Casey.

After James King of William died on May 20th, the paper — in tribute — left his name on the masthead as editor for a week. Then, on May 28th, the page 2 colophon gave notice that Thomas had taken the reigns.

**Colophon showing Thomas S. King as the new editor**, San Francisco *Daily Evening Bulletin*, 28 May 1856, p. 2. Source: Genealogy Bank

In corporate terms, the Bulletin originated in 1855 as a partnership between James King of William and Christian O. Gerberding (d.1863) — with Gerberding taking care of the business side of the enterprise. Both names were on the masthead. But, the corporate name of the firm running the paper was — and remained until after Gerberding’s death: C.O. Gerberding & Co.

Under the new arrangement that was finalized in December 1856, the partnership consisted of three co-proprietors: Gerberding, Thomas King and a printer, Abel Whitton. Whitton lasted only 6 weeks and was replaced by a different printer H.S.M. Farnam, in January 1857. It appears that neither Whitton nor Farnam ever appeared on the masthead.

Thomas King remained the Bulletin’s editor until January 1859, informing readers of his departure in his column of January 17th. King would be heading back East — initially returning to his birthplace of Washington, D.C. (Georgetown), where his mother was in declining health.

King and Farnam sold their interest in the Evening Bulletin to Gerberding, who as a consequence became the paper’s sole proprietor — meaning that Gerberding’s most pressing need now was to find a new editor.

The editor’s chair was filled 2½ months later by James William Simonton (1823–1882), most recently the Washington correspondent of The New York Times.

Simonton first appeared on the Bulletin’s masthead on 31 March 1859. A notice in the following day’s paper confirmed the new business partnership between Messrs. Gerberding and Simonton.

A couple of months later, in June 1859, another business partnership was advertised in the Bulletin — this time, between C.O. Gerberding & Co. and George Fitch:

**Notice of addition of George K. Fitch as a partner in the *Evening Bulletin* company**, San Francisco *Daily Evening Bulletin*, 16 June March 1859, p. 2. Source: Genealogy Bank

Notice how Fitch’s role is described: “He will attend to the business department of the paper during the temporary absence of our senior partner, Mr. Gerberding.”

The fact of the partnership suggests that this “temporary absence” was expected to be of some duration.

The following “three-fold” explanation appeared in the Bulletin a few days later, with the first “fold” being “the recuperation of [Gerberding’s] health, somewhat impaired by intense application to business”:

Here again we see that “the business department of our establishment will be conducted by G.K. Fitch.” Which is to say: Fitch — who, now 33, had a decade of experience starting and running newspapers — was brought in to “mind the store,” not to be the editor.

On 26 January 1860, under the headline “Movements of C.O. Gerberding,” the Bulletin published a letter from Gerberding, dated exactly a month earlier, in which he said he expected to be back in San Francisco by the end of January.

Gerberding’s health continued to fail. And, on 25 January 1861, the Bulletin ran a notice that C.O. Gerberding had sold his interest in the paper to Simonton and Fitch, who had established a new partnership with two junior editors: James Nisbet and C. Julian Bartlett. Under the terms of the partnership, Nisbet and Bartlett took ¹⁄₁₆ each, with Simonton and Fitch splitting the remaining ⅞ evenly. The new partners were listed in a new masthead featuring a new corporate name: The San Francisco Bulletin Company.

C.O. Gerberding died on 24 December 1863.

Even before Gerberding’s retirement, however, there had been a dramatic recasting of roles at the Bulletin. On 1 November 1860, the paper published the following item, reporting that James W. Simonton — described as “the editor of the Bulletin” — “goes East to spend the winter, and devote his energies to still further perfecting the news facilities of this journal”:

“The winter” turned into a permanent arrangement. Simonton stayed with the Bulletin — but, he never returned to live in San Francisco.

Some years later, in 1866, the Marysville Daily Appeal offered its take on how this played out in the political arena — calling the Evening Bulletin “a double–headed paper”:

**Item calling the San Francisco *Daily Evening Bulletin* “a double-headed paper,”** *Marysville Daily Appeal*, 10 May 1866, p. 3. Source: California Digital Newspaper Collection

The truth is: Although James W. Simonton maintained his financial stake in the Bulletin and continued to file reports from Washington and New York as an editorial “correspondent,” the paper was less and less his exclusive focus after he left San Francisco. Indeed, in 1867, Simonton became the general agent for the New York Associated Press, a precursor of the modern AP; he served in this role until 1881.

After 1860 — and especially after 1867 — the person who increasingly was recognized as “the editor” of the Bulletin was George K. Fitch.

:: :: ::

GEORGE FITCH functioned as editor-in-chief of the Daily Evening Bulletin — and was able to function as editor-in-chief — only after James Simonton’s move to the East Coast at the end of 1860. The first subtle clue of an internal power shift: Starting with the issue of 2 April 1861, the masthead ceased to list the names of individual partners.

But, when Joshua Norton presented himself and his Proclamation at the southeast corner of Montgomery and Merchant Streets on 17 September 1859, Simonton still was in San Francisco, and Simonton still was in the chair.

Although George Fitch was on the masthead that day, he was on the second line — just above the address: “Southeast corner of Merchant and Montgomery sts.” (click to enlarge).

It is Simonton (here and here) — not Fitch (here) — who Langley’s city directory of 1859 lists as editor.

And, it is Simonton — not Fitch — who would have had the prerogative, at least, to publish — or not publish — Joshua’s decree.

Consideration of how things actually played out on 17 September 1859 raises a host of unanswered questions:

Were both James Simonton and George Fitch in the Bulletin office that morning? If only one of them was there, which one was it?
With Simonton as the “Executive Editor,” it appears that Fitch was operating as something of a hybrid COO / Managing Editor sharing editorial writing duties with Simonton and a couple of associate editors. What protocols had Simonton and Fitch worked out for how to deal with “walk-ins” like Joshua Norton? Would Joshua’s submission and request have been regarded as a “local” matter for Fitch’s initial review? Or was it so unique as to go straight to Simonton’s desk? Did Simonton or Fitch speak to Joshua when he came to the paper’s office, or did Joshua leave his Proclamation with another editor or reporter?
Who wrote the headline (“Have We an Emperor among us?”) and the brief six-line introduction (“The world is full of queer people, etc.”)? Was it Simonton? Fitch? A junior editor? Some combination of these?

These all are matters of speculation that give ample reason to doubt William Drury’s tidy version of events — which itself is highly speculative, not least, because Drury doesn’t mention James Simonton in his book at all.

Might George Fitch have been the person to receive Joshua Norton on the morning of 17 September 1859 and to recommend to James Simonton that the Bulletin publish Joshua’s original Proclamation in that evening’s edition? Yes. But, there appears to be no documentation of that.

What we do know is that Fitch was not “the editor” of the Daily Evening Bulletin in September 1859 — so was not in a position for Drury to credit him with being the one who published the Proclamation.

William Drury, a career newspaper journalist, got a lot right in portraying the San Francisco newspaper scene of Emperor Norton’s day.

What’s surprising are the basic facts that he got wrong about the paper that started it all.

:: :: ::

Note
I was able to substantiate and confirm certain of my own findings about the early leadership narrative of the San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin with John Denton Carter’s wonderful article, “George Kenyon Fitch: Pioneer California Journalist” (California Historical Society Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 4, 1941, pp. 329–340).

Register for a free “read only” account at JSTOR to read the article here.

:: :: ::

For an archive of all of the Trust’s blog posts and a complete listing of search tags, please click here.

Search our blog...

The Emperor Norton Trust

Joshua Norton at the Transamerica Pyramid

Norton Biographer William Drury Missed the Boat on Where the San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin Was Located — And Who Was the Editor — in 1859