In 1862, Emperor Norton Signed a Petition Supporting Anti-Party Politics
He Had Been Moving in This Direction Since 1856. But This May Be the Earliest Documented Instance in Which — As Emperor — He Formally Aligned Himself With These Efforts.
IN OCTOBER 1854, the California Supreme Court ruled against Joshua Norton in his prolonged contract dispute with Ruiz, Hermanos (Ruiz Brothers), the consignor firm from which he and his partners had agreed to purchase 200,000 pounds of rice for $25,000 in December 1852.
Seven months later, in May 1855, the Fourth District Court of California, based in San Francisco, set $20,000 as Joshua’s obligation.
That same month, Joshua offered himself as a Democratic candidate for City and County Tax Collector — a paid position.
But, by February 1856, Joshua was sufficiently disillusioned with the San Francisco Democratic Party that he joined nearly 1,000 other members of the local party in signing a public statement protesting corruption in the local party; “refus[ing] further allegiance to the General Committee,” i.e., the local party leadership; and pledging to re-establish the local party according to its original ideals.
It’s worth noting that, in February 1856, Joshua was only 6 months away from being forced to declare bankruptcy in August 1856.
Two-and-a-half years later, in August 1858, Joshua Norton took out a 3-day ad in the San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin announcing his run as an “INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE” — all caps in the original — for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives that was coming up in the September 1859 election.
In the announcement, Joshua pledged “to devote the whole of my attention and abilities to promote the interests and welfare of my constituency — irrespective of all parties.”
:: :: ::
A FEW WEEKS AFTER after publishing Joshua Norton’s Proclamation declaring himself “Emperor of the United States” on 17 September 1859, the Daily Evening Bulletin on 12 October 1859 published the Emperor’s second Proclamation, in which the Emperor lamented [emphasis mine]
In advance of the “National Convention” that the recently minted Emperor had called for 8 February 1860, the Bulletin — correctly surmising that the event would not take place — published the Emperor’s prepared remarks.
Emperor Norton was sufficiently concerned by the “open violation of laws [by] parties” that he quoted at length his Proclamation of October 1859.
Later, in August 1869 and September 1876, the Emperor issued Proclamations dissolving and abolishing the Democratic and Republican parties.
And, in July 1875, Emperor Norton gave an impromptu speech at a “No Party” forum held at the Mercantile Library.
:: :: ::
SHORTLY, a discovery.
On the afternoon of 14 May 1856 — less than 3 months after Joshua Norton signed the statement protesting corruption in the local Democratic Party — James P. Casey, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and editor of the San Francisco Sunday Times, shot his rival James King of William, the reforming editor of the Daily Evening Bulletin, on Montgomery Street.
This shocking event prompted the establishment of San Francisco’s Second Committee of Vigilance. Joshua had been a reluctant member of the first Committee, in 1851.
Casey was arrested an placed in a cell near Charles Cora, who had been arrested for the November 1855 murder of U.S. Marshal William H. Richardson.
King of William died on 20 May 1856. On the 22nd — the day of King of William’s funeral — the new Vigilance Committee seized both Casey and Cora from jail and executed, i.e., lynched, them at “Fort Gunnybags,” a former warehouse on Sacramento Street between Battery and Davis that the Committee had appropriated as its headquarters.
:: :: ::
THE CASEY AND CORA incident was the ostensible catalyst for the formation of the Vigilance Committee of 1856.
But, arguably, the root cause was frustration over local political corruption — notably symbolized by the ballot-box stuffing and strong-arm tactics of the political machine run by Democrat David Broderick.
(Broderick himself — who became a California U.S. Senator in 1857 and was an abolitionist notwithstanding his questionable ethics in other areas — died from wounds suffered in a 13 September 1859 duel with his former ally, David Terry, the pro-slavery former Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court. Broderick died on September 16, and it was the next day — a day of public mourning for Broderick — that Joshua Norton declared himself Emperor.)
The Second Vigilance Committee disbanded in 1856.
But, built on the bones of the Committee was a new “anti-party” political party known as the People’s Party.
Supporters of the People’s Party — populist; anti-corruption; reform-minded — believed that the state and national policy preoccupations of the Democratic and Republican parties (and the professional politicians leading those parties) had come to wield too much influence over local affairs and saw this as the source of much of the local political corruption.
So, the People’s Party was a local enterprise focused on local governance.
The “party” swept the local San Francisco elections of 1856 and controlled local government for the next decade.
:: :: ::
ONE MEASURE of the grassroots desire, need, and interest in building and maintaining early momentum for the People’s Party was a petition that the Daily Evening Bulletin announced as follows on 19 April 1862 [emphasis mine in the transcription below]:
Item announcing petition calling on the People’s Party to begin the process of nominating candidates for local San Francisco offices in the next election, San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin, 19 April 1862, p. 3. Source: Genealogy Bank
To the People’s Nominating Committee of 1860–’61. — We, the undersigned loyal citizens and taxpayers of the city and county of San Francisco, earnestly request you to assemble at an early day, to select a Committee to nominate city and county officers, irrespective of party politics, to be supported by the People’s Party.
After initially publishing a list of some 3,000 signatures on 21 April 1862, the Bulletin published the following editorial on April 22:
Editorial on petition calling on the People’s Party to begin the process of nominating candidates for local San Francisco offices in the next election, San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin, 22 April 1862, p. 2. Source: Genealogy Bank
[T]he People’s Party has steadily increased in the public confidence. It is stronger today than at any former period. The people are in favor of continuing a system that has worked so well in defeating the tricks and arts of professional politicians. This is proved by the 4,000 to 5,000 names published in yesterday’s and today’s Bulletin, representing without question a large majority of the voters of the city and county….The truth is, the nominating system adopted by the People’s Party, is the only one that has ever given this city an honest government; and the moment it is abandoned, the politicians, who once plunged the community in bankruptcy, will again have us in their power. When candidates are placed in nomination through the influence of ward meetings, primary elections and conventions, the people must stand back and let tricksters rule. That has been proved, not only in this city, but in every other where politics becomes a trade. Sacramento City is now as good an illustration on this as San Francisco was in 1856.
In the same issue of the 22nd, the Bulletin published the following second round of some 1,000 signatures to the People’s Party petition:
Second round of signatures to a petition calling on the People’s Party to begin the process of nominating candidates for local San Francisco offices in the next election, San Francisco Daily Evening Bulletin, 22 April 1862, p. 3. Source: Genealogy Bank
In the first column, about a third of the way up from the bottom, we find the following intriguingly annotated endorsement: “Norton I. (Emperor, all impartial and independent).”
This may be the earliest documented record of Emperor Norton — as Emperor — formally aligning himself with a specific independent approach to politics.
It may also signal a pivot towards a greater engagement with local and state issues after an initial period, 1859–62, in which the Emperor seemed more interested in national and international affairs.
One question to ask…
By the time Joshua Norton announced in August 1858 his intention to run for U.S. Congress as an “independent candidate,” the People’s Party had been up and running for two years. But, Joshua didn’t mention the People’s Party in his announcement.
Nonetheless, was Joshua Norton connected to — and exchanging ideas with — any of the leaders of the People’s Party during this period?
If so, with whom did Joshua meet? Where did they meet? And what was the substance of the relationship?
:: :: ::
For an archive of all of the Trust’s blog posts and a complete listing of search tags, please click here.
Search our blog...