The Record Union

THE PROPOSED GUBERNATORIAL RESIDENCE.
Years ago the State of California adjudged it just and proper to erect a decent residence building for the Governor of the State, that election to the office should not be barred against the poor man, nor the better conditioned be driven from pillar to post to rent a place suitable for the setting up of his household gods. Then the people elected a bachelor as Governor, and the nearly completed mansion was converted into what is now the State Printing Office, which building has been twice enlarged until its original symmetrical proportions have been destroyed. But the State that early committed itself to the wise policy of providing a house for its Governor. That it did not complete the mansion was due to a spasm of political and misconceived economy, which became epidemic in California about Dolly Varden days, and enabled many a demagogue to ride upon the top wave for a time. That it was not real economy, however, was demonstrated by the conversion of the building, when in truth a proper and fire proof structure should have been erected for the storage of such valuable property as the State Printing Office contains. At several sessions since those days the proposition for a gubernatorial residence has been broached, and at this session a reasonable bill, providing one has passed the Assembly, but is to be unfavorably reported in the Senate to-day by a majority of the committee to which the bill was referred. A minority report will also be made. We trust that the Senate will adopt the latter. The reasons are many. The Governors of this State have been driven to live at hotels, to occupy unsuitable apartments, and some of them, because of the excuse that such a house as was needful could not be rented, have avoided the constitutional obligation to reside at the Capital. It is to the credit of the city that great, large houses are not plentiful to rent, that there is no such property as a Governor should occupy running around seeking tenants. The result is that to ask some resident to vacate his home, as was once done to accommodate a Governor, is humiliating to the State, and puts a heavy tax of cost upon the incumbent of the office. It is a wise and proper thing to do to construct a residence for the Governor large enough for the rich man, and yet one that may be occupied in part only by the poor man. Other States have pursued this policy and have never regretted it. To order such a residence is not uneconomic, and the people of the State are not such niggards as to so pronounce it. The larger representative body of the Legislature has so properly judged their temper upon the question, and certainly the Senate can afford to concur. It is simply a State, not a local, proposition. Sacramento is not concerned in it any more than State pride should concern her people. It is a question of common decency, it seems to us, to have for our Governors as we elect them a fair, commodious and well appointed house into which they can move without sacrifice of half their salaries to get settled for four years in their new home.