On the evening of the same day, Father Neri, at St. Ignatius College, displayed electric lighting for the first time in San Francisco, using three French arc lights.

The most significant event of the second decade was the rise and decline of the Workingmen’s Party, following the remarkable episode of the Sand Lot and Denis Kearney.  The winter of 1876-77 had been one of slight rainfall, there had been a general failure of crops, the yield of gold and silver had been small, and there was much unemployment.  There had been riots in the East and discontent and much resentment were rife.  The line of least resistance seemed to be the clothes-line.  The Chinese, though in no wise responsible, were attacked.  Laundries were destroyed, but rioting brought speedy organization.  A committee of safety, six thousand strong, took the situation in hand.  The state and the national governments moved resolutely, and order was very soon restored.  Kearney was clever and knew when to stop.  He used his qualities of leadership for his individual advantage and eventually became sleek and prosperous.  In the meantime he was influential in forming a political movement that played a prominent part in giving us a new constitution.  The ultra conservatives were frightened, but the new instrument did not prove so harmful as was feared.  It had many good features and lent itself readily to judicial construction.

While we now treat the episode lightly, it was at the time a serious matter.  It was Jack Cade in real life, and threatened existing society much as the Bolshevists do in Russia.  The significant feature of the experience was that there was a measure of justification for the protest.  Vast fortunes had been suddenly amassed and luxury and extravagance presented a damaging contrast to the poverty and suffering of the many.  Heartlessness and indifference are the primary danger.  The result of the revolt was on the whole good.  The warning was needed, and, on the other hand, the protestants learned that real reforms are not brought about by violence or even the summary change of organic law.

In 1877 I had the good fortune to join the Chit-Chat Club, which had been formed three years before on very simple lines.  A few high-minded young lawyers interested in serious matters, but alive to good-fellowship, dined together once a month and discussed an essay that one of them had written.  The essayist of one meeting presided at the next.  A secretary-treasurer was the only officer.  Originally the papers alternated between literature and political economy, but as time went on all restrictions were removed, although by usage politics and religion are shunned.  The membership has always been of high character and remarkable interest has been maintained.  I have esteemed it a great privilege to be associated with so fine a body of kindly, cultivated men, and educationally it has been of great advantage.  I have missed few meetings in the forty-four years, and the friendships