Strauss’ denim work pants out of my satchel and handed them over to Caire, who examined them carefully before handing them back.
“What do you think?” I asked.
“They’re certainly well made with the stitching reinforced with rivets. I’ll wager they’ll be more durable than anything else on the market. We‘d probably sell fewer regular work trousers if these were available at a reasonable price,” he said emphasizing “reasonable.”
“Well, you sell ordinary work pants for $5 to $6 a pair. Our superior denim pants retail for $7.50 and the wholesale price to you would be $6.00 a pair.” I knew he worked on a much better profit margin on his inventory including the work pants he sold, but he was a smart enough businessman to know once the superior product was readily available, few, if any, would want canvas or cotton work pants when the denim one was only a couple of dollars more.
Caire sucked in his breath before replying. “How much time will you give before we have to pay you?” He asked quickly.
“Only 15 days I’m afraid. We’ve expended a lot of money getting into production and we anticipate a tremendous demand not only here but in Sacramento, Stockton and the towns near the placers that provision miners in the field. Thus, we can’t give extended credit,” I stated calmly. He was chewing his upper lip; I was sure he’d seen Levi Strauss peddling his work pants in front of his store and was kicking himself that he hadn’t befriended him as we had.
“How many other suppliers in the city will be carrying the denim pants?” he asked grumpily as Manon served our steak-frites rare and smothered in a shallot sauce. I let him get the taste of the meat and delicious sauce before replying.
“If we arrive at terms, there will be only one other store selling the pants and they will be featuring a more upscale and expensive version, so really for these pants,” I said pointing to the pair he had examined, “there will little competition here in the city. Our aim is to market to miners working in the field who will recognize immediately how superior they are to what they are wearing.”
Caire’s square jaw seemed to relax with my assurance that he’d have little direct competition from other outfitters and suppliers. I went on to describe my need for an assayer and supplies for an assay office and small foundry to assay gold and silver samples and make a variety of gold ingots. Caire was so eager to get the work pants concession that he promised to supply my assay office needs at wholesale rates. Manon served us large slices of apple tart and said sweetly, “You must insist your employees wear both a pair of denim work pants and denim smock when serving clients.” And she pointed to Caire’s shabby, worn cotton smock he’d removed before sitting at our table.
“PORTSMOUTH SQUARE, SAN FRANCISCO”
— litho c. 1853 (author’s collection).
“WELLS FARGO & CO. EXPRESS BUILDING — NE CORNER OF MONTGOMERY & CALIFORNIA STREETS, SAN FRANCISCO”
— litho c. 1853 (author’s collection).
California Gold Rush Journal
CHAPTER THREE
San Francisco — 1853
The Spring of 1853 brought us worries as well as an exciting partnership with Levi Strauss. Governor Bigler proposed to the California Legislature that they authorize another extension of the San Francisco waterfront. The scheme was to extend the existing waterfront another 600 feet into the bay, fill in the extended area to create new bay front lots the state could sell for outrageous prices to help cut the state’s budget deficit. The mayor of San Francisco and the city council opposed the plan as did all the waterfront merchants including us. The city pointed out that the plan would be harmful to shipping by causing ships with heavy draft to anchor much further from shore in treacherous, dangerous currents. It would affect our ship’s position on the Long Wharf and expose our “Eliza” to gale force winds in the rainy season. The state had already leased “waterfront” lots for 99 years and now they would no longer be on the waterfront. Needless to say, the lessees howled about unfair play by greedy, profit-motivated “waterfront lot gamesters” to mostly deaf ears. We had been anxiously awaiting the outcome of the Senate’s vote after the lower house legislature approved the cabalistic plan.
We’d organized all the local merchants on the wharf to sign a petition laying out arguments against the scheme which Attorney Hawthorne forwarded to both houses of the legislature. He was the first to bring us the results on April 26th. The Senate vote was tied at 13-13. Fortunately, Lieutenant Governor Purdy broke the tie with a no vote and we heaved a monumental sigh of relief. For once, David Broderick and his Tammany Hall-style political machine that controlled our city offices were on the right side of this debate. We knew the waterfront lot speculators would target other areas of the shoreline with their schemes, but we could now relax a bit as our wharf was out of their gun sights.
Our local newspapers were rife with speculation for some months that the notorious dancer, actress and seductress, Lola Montez, would make her way to San Francisco once she finished her latest tour of east coast and southern cities. The Alta California made a point to chronicle her every move, salacious tidbit, and performance since she fled scandals in London, where she was sued for bigamy, and on to Paris and Rome where her pursuers and notoriety followed. She arrived in New York City aboard the steamer “Humboldt” in December, 1851 and wasted no time in booking stage performances.
As the east coast reviewers pointed out, the 32-year-old actress and dancer was no longer the stunning beauty she once was who captivated the 60-year-old King Ludwig I of Bavaria who lavished on her money, citizenship and the title of Countess of Landsfeld despite opposition from his wife, Therese, and all of Ludwig’s counselors. Nevertheless, at 32, Lola Montez still had “impressive eyes, a teenager’s figure,” and while no great dancer, she projected “a magnetic stage presence and gracefulness” that charmed audiences.
As the New York papers reported, Montez wasted no time mounting her comeback. On December 29, 1851 she danced “Tyrolienne” from her repertoire on Broadway to a packed house of 3,000 curious New Yorkers. The critics panned her dancing while having to concede, she knew how to engage and enchant her audience and earn $3,400 for her first week’s performances to boot. From New York she toured Boston, Philadelphia, Richmond, Virginia, and Baltimore where she acted in plays and skits that allowed her to show off her dynamic figure, sometimes in men’s clothing and gypsy girl costumes, to the great satisfaction of her male admirers. On her tour to New Orleans, she danced her notorious “Spider Dance.”
To the delight of San Francisco’s primarily male population, Lola Montez arrived in San Francisco with her entourage via New Orleans and Panama on the mail ship, “Northerner” on May 21, 1853. She wasted no time booking an engagement at The American Theatre, which had been recently renovated to seat 3,000. She opened as “Lady Teazle” in “School For Scandal” on May 26, 1853. The best seats in the house sold for $5 and her sold-out first night’s performance netted $4,500. The Alta California loved her performance and their critic wrote, “Lola evidenced all that grace and vitality of one who has turned heads of princes and unmercifully scorned editors and assailants.”
Lola Montez announced that she would perform her renowned “Spider Dance” that seduced King Ludwig I of Bavaria and most recently her fans in New Orleans. Manon brought