halloweendog

RANKING THE SUCCESS OF OUR PETS

Once I heard a renowned journalist asked about his worst assignment as a newspaper cub reporter. “Dog shows,” he answered without hesitation. “People get miffed if their own personal details are slightly wrong in a story, but misspell the name of their prize-winning dog or make a mistake about its precise breed and the owner will call your editor, publisher, and chairman of the board demanding a front page correction and your head on a plate.”

Yikes! If dog show assignments were that dreaded in the 1950s and 1960s, one can only imagine how nervous reporters must have been a half century earlier when the events were a really big deal, with newspapers devoting several pages to list the complete judging results. Photos of selected dogs and their owners often accompanied the coverage, which typically appeared in the sports section – unless the show was sponsored by a “ladies” kennel club, in which case it was shunted off to the society pages.

The first contest in America to judge dogs supposedly happened in 1876, but I’ll bet it probably occurred about five minutes after the guy with the second dog stepped off a ship from England and encountered the guy with the first dog. Dog shows also appear to function as a kind of cultural barometer; lots of shows in good times, not so many when times are lean. The years following the Great Earthquake and the 1907 Bank Panic were not happy ones in the Bay Area, and there were only three shows each in 1907-1908, one of which was a combined dog and poultry affair. But the boom year of 1912 witnessed seven around the Bay Area, including one in Santa Rosa. (There was also a single Bay Area cat show that year, but it turned into a “free for all,” according to the San Francisco Call, after cat owners took umbrage at the judging.)

(RIGHT: Undated photo of unknown child in dog costume. Via doggypostcardsandephemera.tumblr.com)

That 1912 dog show generated considerable excitement in Santa Rosa; despite the town being filled with visitors, most downtown stores closed early that Saturday night so store clerks could attend the show. Less clear today is what kind of impression the show left upon them because our attitudes towards our pets have changed so much. Dog show attendees back then might have been shocked at the idea of our modern pampered pooches living indoors as members of the family, and considering neither kibble nor canned dog food existed yet, they would have been gobsmacked to learn that feeding our doggies is now a multi-billion dollar industry.

Not to say our ancestors did not have great affection for dogs; when Santa Rosa’s fire department dog, “Buster,” was hit by a car he merited an obituary in the Press Democrat. “He was run over and killed by a careless auto driver who had the entire street, and yet would not get by without killing Buster,” lamented the PD, noting the pup was “a favorite with all who have occasion to visit the house or pass it regularly.” Years earlier in the coverage of the heated 1905 Battle of Sebastopol Avenue the only true “human interest” story described “Bum,” a dog that became the mascot of the Petaluma & Santa Rosa Railway, catching rides back and forth as workers competed for his/her attention. And one of the most popular stories ever to appear here involved the 1905-1908 court battle between two men over ownership of “Queen, a valuable varmint dog” – even though the dog had actually died in 1906.

The dark side of the dog show event is whether the economic boost it brought to Santa Rosa caused its newspaper editors to censor themselves. A few weeks before the 1912 show, the San Francisco papers reported Mrs. Maude Duffy, a 24 year-old mother of two, had died of rabies (it was called “the violent disease” in that day) which she contracted from a Santa Rosa dog. Although this was exactly the sort of horrible and tragic death the Press Democrat loved to feature, not a word about her fate appeared in either paper. On the day of her funeral, the Santa Rosa Republican even offered a little editorial about the cruelty of docking a dog’s tail, comparing it to cutting out someone’s tongue so they could not speak.

When the show was over the PD ran an article where the judges and dog owners praised Santa Rosa for its swell show, accompanied by a three page list of ribbon winners. Among them were “Aviator Wonder” and “Dictagraph C” (bull terriers), “Wally von Bluetenwinkle” (dachshund), “Pom Patch Psyche” and “Fluffy Ruffles III,” which took the prize as the best toy dog. Champions all.

ALL DOGDOM IS A’FLUTTER
Bluest Blooded “Toy Dogs” of State Here Saturday

Unless you chance to be a 1913 model of the toy dog fancier, whose fetich [sic] in dogology is real blue blood of the bluest color, you are quite naturally oblivious to the fact that Santa Rosa is at the very crater’s edge of a social function in dog land that is setting the aristocrats of the dogdom of the state into a frenzy of expectant excitement.

You have lazily read, or perhaps heard of the fact that the Kennel Club of this city is arranging its first annual dog show. Perhaps you have yawned your indifference, but the fact may not so much as have percolated your cuticle that the same dog show, with its very first bow to the public, is going to prove one of the most aristocratic events in highly bred dog society ever attempted in any city of the state, aside from the home of dog shows, the City of San Francisco itself.

Because of your possibly near confession of indifference, this is  solemn warning for you to wake up and rub your eyes and then bestir yourself, for Saturday, next Saturday, and all day and evening Saturday, this city is to be the guest of scores of the most famous prize winning, heart capturing dogs of every class, color, size and breed you have ever seen assembled.

World’s champions, national champions, state champions and several score of aspirants for championship honors to come are to be here. To be exact, there was the glittering total of one hundred and sixty dogs entered last night. And there may be more to come.

And with these dogs, one hundred and thirty of which come from the most famous breeding kennels of the state outside of Sonoma county, will come many of the elect in society from exclusive Burlingame, San Mateo and Piedmont to battle for supremacy with the owners of dog kennels in this portion of the state. Great Danes and Bernards and Newfoundlands will yelp and bark their challenges to English Bulls and Scotch Collies, while pink- beribboned poodles of the fluffiest and softest of coats will strut their pride to the delight of the women and children and the disdain of their more powerful brother and sister canines.

Sixty-one handsome trophies have already been hung up as rich prizes to the dogs of most decided points of superiority. With such an array of trophies the reason for such a phenomenal entry list is not far to seek.

The show is to be held in the old armory, adjoining the A street rink, which is fast being prepared for the blue bloods of dogdom. And you who still lazily read these lines would better beshake [sic] yourself and view these dogs on dress parade next Saturday. All Sonoma county dog lovers will be there in force and it will be a dreary day for you if you attempt to find your ordinary relaxations in your usual haunts, because they will be deserted. Everyone will be at Santa Rosa’s first aristicratic [sic] dog show.

– Santa Rosa Republican, October 17, 1912
DOG SHOW SATURDAY WILL INTRODUCE SOME WONDERS

A little army of men is as busy as bees pushing the work at the old armory on A street, preliminary to the big “toy dog” show which the local Kennel Club is offering as its curtain raiser in Sonoma County.

Two facts in themselves will make Saturday’s “toy dog show” unusually notable, if there were not a dozen or a score, other casing to accomplish that result.

These two principal facts are, first, the large number of blue ribbon winners from other dog shows, which will be brought to Santa Rosa for competition, and second, the famous dog show judges who will come here to indicate the blue ribbon winners.

To name the famous prize winners that are coming would be to name many of the nation’s finest canines. In all there will be fully 170 pure blood dogs of every breed and size displayed on the benches that are now being built around the entire outside of the immense floor space. Thirty of these animals will come from Sonoma county, while the balance, some 140 in number, will come from the most noted kennels of the state, including the kennels of many wealthy dog fanciers of Burlingame, San Mateo, Piedmont and other fashionable society sections.

Probably the most notable dog, from the standpoint of “perfect,” is Miss Vera Lindgren’s toy poodle. Nicholas Longworth, said to be the most perfect poodle in America. No less a dog authority than Judge James Mortimer is responsible for the statement that Nicholas Longworth is as near 100 per cent correct as he believes a dog can be bred. Nicholas, although diminutive in size, carries his championship honors with a dignity that would do a Great Dane proud, holding his somber, though baby-like face, at an angle that reflects an almost snobbish knowledge of his doggish superiority. Even the curl of his tassel-cropped tail shows that Nicholas realizes he is “some dog” and doesn’t care who know its [sic].

– Press Democrat, October 17, 1912
THE STORES TO CLOSE AT EIGHT
Everybody Will Visit the Dog Show Tonight and Business Will Be Suspended Early

Local merchants are interested in the first bench show given under the auspices of the Santa Rosa Kennell [sic] Club and to manifest this interest in a way to assist the mangagement to make the show a success have agreed to close their places of business tonight at 8 o’clock to allow employes [sic] and others to attend the show.

Under the rule adopted some weeks ago all grocery stores close at 8 o’clock. In addition for tonight the following will also close at that hour:

[19 stores listed, including millineries, clothing, shoe and department stores]

– Press Democrat, October 18, 1912

Read More

itemseparator

NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEED

Like zombies they stumbled towards courthouse square in downtown Santa Rosa as county workers, already buried under great piles of documents dumped upon them, struggled bravely on with forlorn hopes that someday the onslaught might somehow end.

Do I exaggerate? Only a little; sans the “zombie” flourish – which, as you’ll soon learn becomes weirdly apropos later – that description is true to the spirit of how the Press Democrat described the situation in the beleaguered County Recorder’s office during the spring of 1912:

The recording of these deeds has thrown Recorder Nagle and his force away behind with the regular work…Recorder Nagle is now receiving many letters of inquiry from many States in the Union, and especially has this been so during the past few days. It is impossible for him to answer all the letters that come. They arrive in stacks. Two thirds of the heavy mail received at the Recorder’s office Thursday was made up of these deeds…

At issue were deeds to Sonoma County property which were often won in far-away raffles or drawings for a lucky admission ticket at a nickelodeon movie theater – another article here, “DAWN OF THE DEED” explains how that worked. Other local parcels were sold by real estate hustlers who printed up brochures promising summers spent at a Sonoma County vacation home “roaming through the Redwoods, over the forest-clad hills or along the side of rippling streams, watching and listening to the tumbling falls,” or trying ones luck at tempting “the elusive mountain trout from its hiding place in the shady woodland pools.” All for as little as $10/acre.

It was a con game, or course, but probably not the kind you suspect. This was actual land – albeit divided up in so-called “paper subdivisions” which only existed on maps. Rarely surveyed and often drawn up as drafting school exercises, the maps presented neat rectangular grids, usually of parcels 25 by 100 feet, that followed streets with charming names: “Cherry Creek Boulevard,” or “Walnut way.” In reality, the lots were often on steep, unbuildable hillsides where no streets would ever wind around those impassible slopes. Another name for these subdivisions is “wildcat” – they were on land only wildcats roamed.

As the 1912 Press Democrat reported, County Recorder Fred Nagle found himself under siege by people from out of the area who honestly believed they would soon be moving to California’s Eden. “Letters from other counties, from British Columbia, from Nevada, from Arizona, from Oregon and Washington are pouring in to the Recorder, the Assessor, the Tax Collector and to other officials of Sonoma, pleading for information regarding these peculiar transactions,” historian Tom Gregory wrote in a letter to the PD.

One man wrote to ask if the San Francisco trolley ran out to “Cloverdale Heights.” A guy from Albuquerque came out looking for his lot near the town of “Russian River” and someone from Denver stopped by the Recorder’s office to record his deed and left disgusted that he had been tricked into also buying another lot adjacent to the phony homesite he won with his “lucky number.”

But Recorder Nagle and his staff weren’t only kept busy answering letters and fielding long-distance phone calls; they were actually busily recording deeds for those unusable chunks of land because the new owner had sent the county the $6.50 recording fee. “The recording of these deeds has thrown Recorder Nagle and his force away behind with the regular work,” reported the PD, noting the volume was particularly harmful because the county was then at the start of a legitimate real estate boom.

While the scam first attracted attention in 1912, that was by no means the end of it; wildcat lots continued to be given away or sold for years to come. Had even a teensy portion of these properties been developed, Sonoma county would be a far different place today. With over 15,000 of these lots in the Cazadero vicinity alone, “Cazadero Woodlands” and the other subdivisions would have been the largest city north of San Francisco – over five times the size of Santa Rosa at the time.

Virtually none of this land was developed, of course, and most buyers simply stopped paying taxes when they realized they had been swindled, so the land went back to the county or state. But holding on to the land was easy, too; the property tax was almost nothing and sometimes Uncle Fletcher’s mysterious property out in California was handed down. Taxes paid or not, there always has been a steady trickle of people coming in to the Assessor’s office with a yellowed slip of paper to enquire whether it showed they had a secret forgotten fortune. The answer was always: No.

That is, until resurrection day.

Flash forward sixty years as California enacts a minor tweak to the law to “let property owners know where they stand.” Say you inherited 100 acres handed down in the family from great-great-grandpa. He bought half of it from a neighbor in the 1880s, tore down the separating fence and farmed it all as a single plot. Did you inherit two parcels or one? According to the new law, you owned two – as long as some paperwork called an “administrative certificate of compliance” was obtained from the county. Sounds fair, right?

But that was just the beginning. State law also decreed anyone with a deed had the right to reclaim property lost in tax default by paying all the back taxes due. Thus whomever had the deed to Uncle Fletcher’s worthless little parcel could own it again. That deed-holder could then go to the county to obtain one of those administrative certificates. And with that in hand, the little parcel, once just part of a grid on an old and useless map, sprang into life as a duly-recognized legal property that could be sold – or developed.

‘Turns out quite a bit had happened since back in the day when poor old Fred Nagle was grumbling about the futility of recording all those worthless paper lots – namely, it wasn’t so certain the land was still worthless. There were now paved roads and utilities available in once wild ‘n’ wooly places like Cazadero and Dry Creek, and modern construction techniques made it possible to build on places that would have been impossible when the maps were drawn. At the same time all Sonoma county property values were skyrocketing in the 1980s, in large part because there were strict zoning restrictions on new land development – regulations that didn’t apply to Uncle Fletcher’s movie theater prize, once it was awarded a certificate of compliance.

In the early 1990s I wrote often about the fallout from the certificate process for the old E.I.R. newspaper, California Lawyer magazine, and other publications, and much of what follows is lifted from those articles. I found planners fearful the certificates would destroy Sonoma county agriculture, turning the rural areas into a crazy quilt of McMansion subdivisions, far from sewer lines, modern roads, and other infrastructure needed for their support. And under state law, the county was powerless to stop it. “It’s like ‘Night of the Living Dead,'” one county planner grimly joked to me, “all of these old properties are rising from the grave.”

They had reason to fear: There were an estimated 75,000 lots in this county that could be resurrected by certificates. Recorder Fred and his successors had been busy, indeed.

Making matters worse, developers were always two giant steps ahead of the county. Uncle Fletcher’s bungalow-sized parcel wasn’t worth developing by itself – but having deeds for almost every parcel in his entire wildcat subdivision was a different story. In the 1980s and early 1990s there were companies formed in Sonoma county to search out descendants of all those people who once sent the county that $6.50 registration fee. It was no easy task; the average size of these wildcat subdivisions was over 800 lots, according to a county memo. The game of find-the-heir was like a marathon scavenger hunt – collect ’em all to win the prize.

Was it worth all that work? You bet; Mr. Developer could then strut through the doors of the county planning department pushing a wheelbarrow full of documents – one infamous submission included over 25 pounds of paperwork – and declare he had the rights to build a mammoth project. As the parcels were recognized as having existed since 1912 (or whenever), his project superseded all modern rules and environmental protections. It didn’t matter if the land was in an agricultural preserve or community greenbelt; it didn’t matter whether the land could pass a septic “perc” test to allow homeowners the luxury of flush toilets. It even didn’t matter whether the property had reasonable access. In a scandalous 1992 application, a developer claimed two hundred certificates on a remote, 3,000 ft. elevation hilltop near the Geysers where the only access was Pine Flat Road, terrifyingly steep and scarcely wider than a private driveway.

But the developers never proposed following the original subdivision layout on the old maps; those were just grid lines, remember, with no relation to actual terrain. No, the certificates of compliance were just bargaining chips. After paperwork for the certificates were filed, developers would follow by requesting “lot-line adjustments,” allowing them to cluster lots on the best parts of the land and build as many homes as possible. This also allowed developers to posture as the good guy while negotiating with the county – “Hey, I have 500 certificates, but I’m asking permission to build only 150 houses.”

And in some cases, the threat of possible certificates was all a developer needed. The county was so worried about development at the peak of Pine Flat Road that the Open Space District bought it. No paperwork was filed applying for certificates on the supposed 200 parcels, although the Sonoma Land Trust and the developer privately agreed he could probably get at least 27 recognized.

Sonoma county led the legal fight against the certificate process for more than three decades. Details would probably bore most readers here, but it was mostly a story of disheartening defeats. The county adopted a cutoff date of 1929, which was the year the Subdivision Map Act was passed in the state. That law required counties to have regulations and local ordinances defining how subdivision should be done, and the county reasoned that properties after that year would at least have been surveyed or otherwise proven to be real. But a few months later the Attorney General slapped that rule down, leaving all doors open.

Only since the year 2001 has the pendulum has begun swinging back to local control. In a landmark case involving land near Sebastopol, the state Supreme Court ruled that old maps weren’t necessarily legitimate simply because they existed, and certainly were no justification for bypassing current rules and regs. Another court decision ruled against a Petaluma developer and has apparently quashed the hopes of anyone using a paper subdivision map created prior to 1929. So at long last, the fake subdivisions seem to be dead and buried.

The long arc of this story is amazing, if you ponder a moment on it: A 1912 movie ticket sold in Kansas became part of a magic talisman that would allow its bearer immunity to laws in California, 70 or 80 or 90 years later. Robert Ripley might have enjoyed writing it up for his Believe It Or Not! series. He liked to tell unbelievable stories.

BUNGALOW LOTS GO WITH SHOW
Rushing Business Being Carried On by Numerous Nickelodeons Throughout the Country

Editor Press Democrat: The “Bungalow Site Industry” in Sonoma county goes merrily on, and the “Fairy Sylvan Resorts” where the fairies may resort after they have fallen to the “game” and have come through with the $6.50 or other cash for the deed to the lot are going just as fast as the “drawings” can be drawn. Imperial Sonoma has fallen into hard lines, and her name is being used abroad to extract coin from the “easy” ones. The game is a little, simple thing–a sweet little simple thing. Somebody files a map–calls his tract by a catchy name–offers his lots by divers and lottery-ish methods, and the fish rises to the bait. These “opportunities” are not given generally to the public in Sonoma county, but at a distance. Letters from other counties, from British Columbia, from Nevada, from Arizona, from Oregon and Washington are pouring in to the Recorder, the Assessor, the Tax Collector and to other officials of Sonoma, pleading for information regarding these peculiar transactions. The character of the victims may be determined by the tenor of these letters–they are poor, and in many instances, illiterate, just the class of persons that may fall to such a cheap skin-game as this…

…And the location where these “Sharks” are doing their “best” work strike one as peculiar. Around Sacramento, where a local real land-boom is on, the victims are buying $6.50  mirage bungalow site in Sonoma county; in Los Angeles–where every prospect pleases (or is advertised to please) and every man is not vile–they are sending their six-fifty deeds to the county for record. A man in Albuquerque, N. M., in a raffle won a six-shooter, and with his “win” was a lot–20×40 feet–somewhere in the neighborhood of “Russian River,” Sonoma county. After he had dropped eight or ten dollars in the game, he loaded the other portion of his winnings and went gunning for the “lot” sharp. He is now putting in his leisure time cussing Sonoma county, Cal., and yet admiring the scheme that beat him–an old, seasoned territorial sport–so easily.

Among the letters the County Recorder receives daily is one he found in his mail yesterday from Oregon City, Or., in which the writer says he won at a Nickelodeon in his city a lot in this county and he wants to know if the property is worth the $6.50. D. Andersen–that’s his name–(can anybody give him the information?) inclosed with his note of inquiry a handbill of the show describing the mythical lot, and that description is a gem: “Two bubbling, dashing, splashing, crashing, like the famous waters that come down at Lodore[,] branches of Russian River flow the idealic [sic] place; it is on the Northwestern Pacific line, while Healdsburg, a city of over 4,000 inhabitants, is not; Santa Rosa, “the ideal city of California” and Luther Burbank, “the plant wizzard,” (with two z’s) are invoked to further the “boost.” And it ends up with a request to “Come Along and Bring the Children and take Advantage of Thes FREE DRAWINGS and Secure a Home Site at this Famous Resort in Sonoma County, where a Chance is Given Away ABSOLUTELY FREE With Each Ticket.”

The time has come to stop this business. If the Board of Supervisors, or a Grand Jury of this county cannot do something to discourage the traffic, the newspapers should take the matter up. Every exchange should reprint this article, and spread the tiding abroad that this cheap, cheap game may be ended. Our splendid county, with her grand scenic features, is getting the advertising she does not deserve, and does not want. Sonoma wants “everybody to come along and bring the children,” but she does not want the bunkoed before they get here.

Tom Gregory.
Santa Rosa, Feb. 9, 1912.

– Press Democrat, February 10, 1912
MANY MYTHICAL LOTS ARE SOLD
“Cloverdale Heights” a Rugged Piece of Hill Not Yet Surveyed, They Say

From Cloverdale comes another complaint of the manner in which people are being duped all over the State and in adjoining states by the sale of lots in worthless tracts.

Mention of what looks like near fraud, at least has been made from time to time in the Press Democrat in connection with the immense amount of work entailed at the office of County Recorder Fred Nagle by the recording of deeds to lots given away with tickets at moving picture shows in different parts of the State. The following from the Cloverdale “Reveille” will be read with interest:

Cloverdale business men have the last several days received letters from parties making inquiries regarding “Cloverdale Heights” and another piece of property which bears the rather high sounding title of “Cloverdale Terrace.” These inquiries, which come from San Francisco and other cities, some from as far as Kansas City, Mo., are from people who have invested small sums of money under the delusions that they were securing a fine summer home overlooking Cloverdale. In some instances the inquiries show a lack of information regarding the location of Cloverdale, evidently believing the “Orange City” is a suburb of San Francisco and connected with the metropolis by cable or trolley car. The Reveille is informed that the Recorder’s office is kept busy placing deeds on record to lots in the above named tracts. As near as can be learned “Cloverdale Heights” is nothing more than a rugged piece of land located about three miles northwest of Cloverdale via air line, with no road leading to the land, except an old untraveled one new unfit for use. Until sold a short time ago it was owned by Erik Angler, who took it up as a homestead some years ago.

– Press Democrat, April 13, 1912
MANY PEOPLE STILL BITING ON MOVING PICTURE TICKET LOTS
“Does San Francisco Street Car Line Run Out to Cloverdale Heights?” Asks One Enquirer

Wouldn’t this jar you?

“Will you tell me if the San Francisco electric car system runs to the place?” asks an inquirer in a letter for information about Cloverdale Heights, one of the rock-bound “paradises” for which tickets are being “given away” in chances in moving picture houses, presumably all over the country. This inquiry came from a lot “winner” in Kansas City.

Such a big laugh. And yet it is quite possible that the inquirer had been led to believe that the beautiful city of Cloverdale was located on the electric car system of San Francisco, when in reality it is many miles away and on the line of the Northwestern Pacific. Some time since the Cloverdale people considered the taking of some steps to prevent deception practiced upon unsuspecting people by such clap-trap as the proposition mentioned.

The other day a well-known citizen of Cloverdale called at the office of County Recorder Fred G. Nagle to ask where the “Heights” were located, and was surprised to find that such a place really existed.

Still They Come

Stacks of deeds are still being received at the Recorder’s office from lot owners in the several plots that are being handled in different parts of Sonoma county by means of the moving picture house tickets. The plan has been explained several times in this and other papers. But people are still biting. The recording of these deeds has thrown Recorder Nagle and his force away behind with the regular work. The recording of legitimate transactions has been very heavy for months on account of the activity in the realty business and the many new settlers who are coming to the county and purchasing homes.

Came From Denver

A few days ago a man came to Recorder Nagle’s office. He had traveled to Sonoma county from Denver, Colorado, to inspect the lots he had become heir to through holding “a lucky number.” In addition, he had been induced to purchase an adjoining lot. It cost him his time and about $200 to come to the “ideal summer site.” He turned back disgusted and went home.

The plan has progressed far beyond the boundaries of California, as this instance indicates. Recorder Nagle is now receiving many letters of inquiry from many States in the Union, and especially has this been so during the past few days. It is impossible for him to answer all the letters that come. They arrive in stacks. Two thirds of the heavy mail received at the Recorder’s office Thursday was made up of these deeds to lots.

As much as possible, Recorder Nagle, County Assessor Frank E. Dowd, and the newspapers of this city and county have been sending broadcast that the great county of Sonoma, with its unequaled resources and matchless climate, has nothing whatever to do with this false boom of practically worthless property. It could all be avoided if people would reason out the improbability of securing for the song of a few dollars–$6.50 for the deed–must be in the nature of a catch for an easy mark.

– Press Democrat, May 24, 1912

Read More

turkeytrotcartoon

WILL SANTA ROSA BAN DIRTY DANCING?

Attention, young people: Your music’s terrible and your dancing is so disgusting we might outlaw it, just as Petaluma did.

For several months between 1912-1913, the nation’s fabric was threatened by a new dance fad called “ragging.” President-elect Woodrow Wilson cancelled the inaugural ball to block the risk of dancing guests creating a scandal. In Patterson, New Jersey, 18 year-old Ethel Foster was sentenced to 50 days in jail for doing it. A New York City club owner named Wallace W. Sweeney died in prison while serving nine months for “keeping a disorderly place” that allowed the dancing, while at least two men went to jail in Petaluma for disturbing the peace by doing the “rag.”

So what was this vile dance that had the power to shatter the country, if not civilization itself? It was… the “Turkey Trot.”

Today it’s nigh impossible to understand the enormous fuss. It’s a silly, up-tempo dance step that has a couple holding each other in (non-controversial) waltz position, one arm out and the other on shoulder/waist. You can see a snippet of professional dancers here, although in practice it was probably more like this clip, with sweaty couples just bouncing around the dance floor more or less in time with the music. In some descriptions the couple was supposed to flap their elbows like an agitated turkey which led more than a few newspapers to pun about the “poultry of motion.”

The Turkey Trot might have been the most (in)famous dance around that time, but there were a number of equally dumb novelty dances such as the Bunny Hug (cheek-to-cheek but hips canted as far back as possible). Other dances with animal themes that year included the Monkey Glide, Fresno Flea, Angle Worm Wiggle, Possum Trot, Kangaroo Dip and Horse Trot (see photo below). Sometimes the dances had a specific gimmick; the music for the Grizzly Bear would stop abruptly whereupon the dancers would shout, “It’s a bear!”

These were called at the time “huggly-wiggly dances” (!) and now scholars seem to agree they were popular because of the opportunities they offered couples for “lingering close contact.” I don’t completely buy that explanation – a major part of the appeal was that dancers looked silly because the dance instructions required them to look silly. America was mostly a rhythm-challenged nation that liked the catchy toe-tapping tunes such as Alexander’s Ragtime Band, but had no clue as to how to dance to this new pop music. So let’s follow the dance directions and wiggle our hips doing the Jelly Jiggle and laugh about how ridiculous everyone looks.

(RIGHT: Excerpt of NY Times article, January 21, 1913)

The ragging crisis led Press Democrat gossip columnist “Dorothy Anne” to write a lengthy essay, transcribed below. Normally she penned a boring weekly column on the doings of Santa Rosa’s gentry (she was Mrs. Mary McConnell Houts and her husband owned the town’s major auto dealership) but occasionally she dished up an offering like this, posing as the snooty arbiter of decency and good taste – often with unintentionally funny results (see “IN LOVE WITH DOROTHY ANNE” for more).

Here she began by pointing out Santa Rosa was torn between those who “ragged” and the “anti-raggers,” while Petaluma had done the right thing and banned it outright. “The result is that the crowd that dances on Saturday night do not dance in Petaluma, they come to Santa Rosa!” she moaned. Women’s groups in other Bay Area cities were trying to shut down the dancing at “exclusive” venues, she continued, and it was time for Santa Rosa women to do likewise:

When the “rag” drifted into Santa Rosa is not quite definitely known. It was first danced at the Sunday night dances in the Italian quarter, west of the track. There it is rumored certainly society young men learned it. They liked it so well they taught it to their society girl friends in a modest form. An attempt to stop it was made but teaching it to society proved a boomerang. If society can “rag” at their exclusive dances, anybody can “rag.” And the result? Well, there are several stories–numerous ones that drift in from different quarters–but they are unprintable! That’s why my strong plea that Santa Rosa women come to the realization that “ragging” is what it is–a dance of the tenderloin and has no place in polite society.

Whether Dorothy Anne’s moralistic hissy fit had much effect is unknown, but there were a few stories in the local papers of raggers being kicked out of dances. Police apparently were called to break up a dance at a Fulton roadhouse.

Santa Rosa’s National Guard Company E announced it would hold “clean and appropriate” Saturday night dances at their downtown armory. “Nothing will be permitted at any time that savors of ragging, and those who want to rag are warned that none of that character of dancing will be permitted under any circumstances,” the Republican newspaper stated. But only a few weeks later, the paper reported, “the dances were discontinued because of the small amount of patronage which was given them.” The article also mentioned, “…other parties who have maintained strict decorum at their places of entertainment have also suffered from a lack of patronage.” The headline for that article: “DO SANTA ROSA PEOPLE WANT DECENT DANCES?” Clearly, the answer was no.

As a Comstock House footnote to the Turkey Trot tumult, it was probably at one of those Company E dances where 21 year-old second lieutenant Hilliard Comstock met his future wife Helen. In her oral history, she recalled Hilliard always said he asked to dance with the pretty little girl who had “red cheeks and curls up on top of her head.” According to him, 13 year-old Helen stuck a finger in her mouth and replied, “I don’t rag, thank you.”

Ragging
by Dorothy Ann

For some weeks past Santa Rosa society has been in the throes of a discussion that has divided itself into–not four parts–but those who did not.

For the benefit of the uninitiated will explain that “ragging” is a dance and that one of its mystic mazes is the “Turkey Trot.” All are closely identified with “Alexander’s Rag Time Band.” In fact, so close is the relationship that even the “anti-raggers” show symptoms of motion when the first strains of “Come on Along” are heard.

Society in Santa Rosa has “ragged.” From the children that compose the sub-debutante set to the staid married people, all have taken a fling at the dance that had its origin in Barbary Coast in San Francisco. Those who had charge of the Saturday night dances announced that if society could dance the rag in the Saturday Afternoon Clubhouse, they also could dance it. They did. This merely to show you that the “rag”  is not confined to one class. Mercy, no!

Nor is it confined to one town. Petaluma is a bit conservative. They do not allow the “Turkey Trot,” the “Bunny Hug” or the “Grizzly Bear” danced in their halls at any time. They have printed signs to warn one. It does not make any difference which crowd hires the hall, the sign remains in the same place. And they say that the result is that the crowd that dances on Saturday night do not dance in Petaluma, they come to Santa Rosa!

There has been much discussion as to the actual origin of the “Turkey Trot.” Every one knows that the waltz originated in Germany. The Germans are very proud of the fact. But the “Turkey Trot” originated in San Francisco. No one has yet stepped forward to accept the laurels for introducing it. The actual origin of the dance is said to have been at the time that the fleet visited San Francisco, when a few half drunken sailors taught it to the demi-monde of the Barbary Coast.

Quite recently, Sacramento society was split asunder by a discussion that resulted in the Tuesday Club, the prominent woman’s club of that city, pass the following resolution:

“Resolved, That the Board of Directors of the Tuesday Club of Sacramento deem the consideration of ‘ragging’ of sufficient importance to be referred to the Women’s Council.”

The Women’s Council is the moral arbitrator of Sacramento. The reasons given for this step were as follows:

“It was brought out in the discussion that such dances were questionable in their origin, had a bad influence, especially on the young and impressionable, and that the general nature tended towards evil.”

The ban has been put on “ragging” by the Board of Directors of the Ebell building which is occupied by the prominent Ebell Club of Oakland. This club is composed of 600 representatives of Oakland’s best families. These women followed the example of the Home Club, another exclusive women’s organization of Oakland, who passed resolutions “the craze which has swept from Barbary Coast to New York and back again.”

The L’Amida Assembly of Oakland, an exclusive dancing club, cut its invitational list almost in twain in order to eliminate the “raggers.”  They solved the problem simply. They did not invite those who had “ragging” proclivities.

The new mode of terpsichorean art has aroused the ire of the patronesses of the exclusive Junior Assembly in Oakland, with the result that an announcement was made that the rag would not be tolerated. A meeting was called of the patronesses who discussed the various glides and turns which have their origin in the “Turkey Trot,” “Grizzly Bear” and “Bunny Hug,” with the result that any suggestion of “ragging” was unheard.

The San Jose Cotillion Club quite recently gave a party at the Vendome. During the evening several couples dared to dance the “rag.” The haughty matrons of San Jose did not mince their opinions. They took their daughters and went home. They would not even be a party to looking on. The controversy still wages at blood heat in that city.

When the “rag” drifted into Santa Rosa is not quite definitely known. It was first danced at the Sunday night dances in the Italian quarter, west of the track. There it is rumored certainly society young men learned it. They liked it so well they taught it to their society girl friends in a modest form. An attempt to stop it was made but teaching it to society proved a boomerang. If society can “rag” at their exclusive dances, anybody can “rag.” And the result? Well, there are several stories–numerous ones that drift in from different quarters–but they are unprintable! That’s why my strong plea that Santa Rosa women come to the realization that “ragging” is what it is–a dance of the tenderloin and has no place in polite society.

Many local observers have expressed their unfavorable opinion of these dances, and among these I note one which is brief and clear to the simplest understanding:

“The dances are not graceful in motion, are not dignified in character, and having originated in places of vile repute, they have not the approval of respectable people. If the beautiful old waltz, the more modern two-step, et als., have lost their place in society, cut out the dancing and take up politics.”

The “Turkey Trot”, the “Texas Tommy,” The “Grizzly Bear,” The “Fresno Flea”, the “Chicken Reel,” the “Bunny Hug,” the “Frisco Flip,” are all on a par and belong where they originated on Barbary Coast–where half drunken sailors dance with the demi-monde.

– Press Democrat, January 14, 1912
“RAGGERS” EXCLUDED

Several couples of young people who attended Miss Vitale’s dancing academy Wednesday evening were made to leave that place because they refused to desist from ragging. Their money was refunded and they were asked not to attend the academy dances in the future. Miss Vitale conducts an orderly and proper dancing academy and will at all times prevent ragging at her institution.

– Santa Rosa Republican, July 11, 1912
BROKE UP RAG DANCE AT FULTON

Yes, we had a little ragging at Fulton Saturday night, but no orgy or free for all fight in my premises.

I never violated the mandates of the officers.

At 12 o’clock sharp my place of business was closed, according to law.

What happened in the streets or on the railroad track–I don’t pay any more poll tax, and I don’t think I had any business–

But just about the time the dance was broken up, every body was in the hall, dancing.

They were all too hungry to be carousing or fighting in the streets o [sic] any place else.

And then they all had to leave without their supper, after paying for it.

It’a a conundrum to me why the Rag dance was broken up.

Respectfully yours,
A. DALESSI.

– Santa Rosa Republican, October 10, 1912
COMPANY E WILL HAVE ONLY APPROVED DANCING

Company E, N. G. C., has determined to inaugurate a series of Saturday evening dances at their armory at the corner of Fourth and D streets, and will cater only to those who desire and believe in clean and appropriate dancing. Nothing will be permitted at any time that savors of ragging, and those who want to rag are warned that none of that character of dancing will be permitted under any circumstances.

An able floor manager has been secured and he will be assisted by members of the company. The dancing will begin at 8:30 o’clock and will continue until midnight each Saturday evening, and the soldier boys hope to have the patronage of the good people of the city, who are pleased to dance properly.

Good music will be furnished at all times, and the floor at armory hall is one of the best and roomiest in the city. With this combination and appropriate behavior, people can enjoy themselves at all times.

The invitations which the militiamen are presenting to their friends has the following on it:

“We are running a clean dance and want clean people. You are invited to bring your wife, sister, daughter or sweetheart, and enjoy a few hours’ approved dancing. Good floor; good music. Gentlemen 50 cents, ladies free. The other kind not admitted at any price.”

The militiamen are in earnest and hope to make their dances among the most popular in the City of Roses.

– Santa Rosa Republican, December 5, 1912
EJECT TWO DANCERS FOR “RAGGING”

After repeated warnings to desist from “ragging” at the Woodman hall dance Saturday night, two men were ejected. There was considerable excitement for a time, but the management insists that no “ragging” will be tolerated. All who desire to dance, according to the rules are welcome to the dance, but those who will not abide by the rules will not be allowed to dance.

– Press Democrat, December 8, 1912
DO SANTA ROSA PEOPLE WANT DECENT DANCES?

Recently Company E started a series of Saturday evening dances and announced they would permit nothing but proper dances at their parties. After a thorough trial the dances were discontinued because of the small amount of patronage which was given them. Other academics and dances in this city secure crowds, possibly because they were not so strict in their interpretation of what constituted “decent” dancing. Most of the places where public dances pay [sic] are places where “ragging” and “dipping” and other questionable dancing are permitted through the connivance of those in charge. Certain parties have announced that their places would not permit such questionable dancing, simply to induce mothers to let their daughters attend their public dances. The question arises. Do the people of Santa Rosa want decent dances? If they do they should have patronized the Company E dances instead of other places where rules were less strict. Other parties who have maintained strict decorum at their places of entertainment have also suffered from a lack of patronage. It seems only proper that the public should patronize those places which insist on strict deportment, and are attempting to elevate this pleasant pastime.

The Saturday evening dances under the auspices of Company E were discontinued at the suggestion of friends of the organization, who though perhaps some other night might be better, and the members may soon inaugurate a series of Thursday evening parties.

– Santa Rosa Republican, January 11, 1913
PETALUMA BARS ALL RAG DANCING

If you go to a dance in Petaluma don’t “rag” or you are liable to find yourself in jail charge with disturbing the peace. This is the fate the befell E. F. Soutz, a visitor to the Egg city. Soutz attended a dance at the Unique theatre the other night and started to “rag.” He was arrested and after a time spent in jail was released on $25 bail. He will be tried on the charge of disturbing the peace.

– Press Democrat, February 7, 1913
“RAGGING” CHARGE WAS TRIVIAL; DISMISSED

The arrest of one E. H. Silva of Petaluma on a charge of “ragging” at a public dance given in that city has been dismissed. The charge in this instance was considered trivial. The evidence of a number of witnesses is said to have been somewhat amusing and did not warrant a conviction. Silva may bring an action for damages in the Superior court against his accuser for false imprisonment. “Ragging” does not go in the egg center.

– Press Democrat, February 18, 1913

Read More