Historical Footnotes
9. Revolution in San Francisco
Link to Start / Introduction / Table of Contents
9. Revolution in San Francisco
The career of great Vigilance Committee, that of 1856, was one of the most important political events ever to occur in the United States. Unlike the earlier and lesser Vigilance Committee of 1851 (covered in preceeding Footnotes), the great Committee can be near impossible to understand from our perspective. There are some reasons for this, worth reflecting on, before diving in concretely in the Footnotes following.
The first is the connection between the two Committees. The later and much greater one declared it was the same or but a mere revival of the earlier and lesser one, using the same title and its intimidating icon of the "all seeing eye." It's true that many, perhaps most, of the leaders of the '56 Committee had served on that of '51, but this was mostly because many of the wealthiest and most influential businessmen in San Francisco had not changed. Asserting a connection with the eariler Committee was mostly an attempt to leverage its popularity and recognized success in retrospect. But the '56 Committee was a very different animal in purpose and ambition, and so we can't let the mere name confuse us.
Equally important is the use of "Vigilance." This term, and that of the more common "vigilante," suggests to us mob action against criminals. While this was absolutely true of 1851, which was reacting to a crime wave threatening the infant City, and where the citizens applauded and assisted the Committee in no organized array, it was the opposite of 1856. There was no crime wave to supress in '56 nor were the citizen supporters just a mob. The '56 Committee armed and uniformed thousands of ordinary San Franciscans into a drilled and disciplined military force under the command of its commissioned officers, operating from a veritable fortress. There has never been an uprising against elected government in the United States approaching such a scale, of such duration, so well organized and managed.
The first Committee and its citizen supporters were entirely Americans, and their targets were nearly all Australian convicts. But the great Committee organized all residents of San Francisco beneath their banner, including most of the non-citizen Europeans (British, French and German). These were a significant percentage of the population, who couldn’t vote or otherwise play any role in politics. And though there was a superficial focus on some individuals as criminals, the Committee's targets were entirely Americans, on political instead of public safety grounds.
Finally, and most importantly, the purpose of the eariler Committee was definite and obvious, so that when it was accomplished, the Committee could withdraw and turn the City back to its elected officers. Its successes could be measured in the near evaporation of all robbery and arson. But the motives of the great Committee were never clear to anyone, in part because of an environment approaching chaos and in part because its different members had conflicting motives, many of which morphed inexplicably during the Committee's reign. And therefore no one could feel certain that its leaders would ever give up power and return it to the City government. In this respect, the 1856 Committee led a revolution in the proper meaning of the term, and it was mostly on account of a bizarre and unanticipated incident that its leaders chose — not to give the City back to its elected leaders — but rather to replace them in elected government with its own. Only this way did the revolution end in peace and in a permanent success for its adherents, who could never have imagined this conclusion when they first assumed command.