The Waterfront Property War: A Seattle Legal Standoff
A real estate battle over water frontage reveals the cutthroat competition between rival companies in 1887 Seattle.
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.
A reporter of the Post-Intelligencer called on T. S. Miller, of the Bay View Land Company, yesterday to find out about the injunction suit. 'As soon as we found that the Construction Company would not accept our offer for a right of way through our property,' Miller said, 'we appealed to Judge Jones for an injunction to restrain them from driving piles in front of our property, and the order was granted by the Court. Mr. Dudley's statement in regard to improvements on that property was substantially correct. But,' the reporter asked, 'Mr. Miller, your company has exercised its right of eminent domain through private property in the past, and now how can you consistently object to another company, reinforced by the laws with the same right as your company, doing the same as you have?' Mr. Miller replied, 'The case is very different, and I will show you the reason why. Congress grants railroad companies the right to condemn private property for public necessity, because railroads are a public benefit. But Congress has never granted a private benefit a right to injure the property of another. Our business is increasing to such an extent that we shall soon need more room, and especially when we get over our busy season. We have already had some correspondence with the Canadian Pacific Railway regarding the matter, and are willing to have either term of the dilemma that the courts may decide in the law.'
“Congress grants railroad companies the right to condemn private property for public necessity... But Congress has never granted a private benefit a right to injure the property of another.”
This 1887 dispute over waterfront access, eminent domain, and private versus public interest feels like a direct ancestor to modern Seattle fights over port authority and land-use development. The struggle to balance corporate expansion with property rights remains as contentious today as it was in the late 19th-century boom days.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.