The Residency Trap: Spokane’s 1887 Council Election Scandal
A city charter dispute threatens to unseat a newly elected official over residency requirements following a major county seat move.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
There is a contest over the office of Councilman of the Fourth Ward. B. C. Van Houten was elected to fill that office for the ensuing term, and he was one of the only two candidates elected on the ‘Hodge’ ticket. The ground of the contest is this: Section 14, chapter 111, of the Charter of Spokane Falls, provides that no person shall be eligible to any office in the City of Spokane Falls who, at the time of his election or appointment, is not entitled to the privileges of an elector according to the laws of Washington Territory, and who has not resided in the city for six months immediately preceding his election or appointment. Mr. Van Houten, who is the present Auditor of Spokane county, took up his residence in Spokane Falls, it would seem, only since November 1st, 1886, when the county seat was removed from Cheney to this city. At least, that is the allegation of the contestant in his petition. Mr. Van Houten’s answer should be interesting reading.
“Mr. Van Houten’s answer should be interesting reading.”
Residency requirements remain a volatile point in local politics, often used to challenge the legitimacy of elected officials. Just as Spokane struggled with the shifting geography of its county seat in 1887, modern Seattle grapples with how rapidly changing neighborhoods and boundaries intersect with the legal eligibility of those who seek to govern them.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.