The Laundry Business Dispute
A lawsuit reveals the hidden profits of a Chinese laundry operation on Fourth and Main streets.
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.
It has been a long-standing complaint that Chinese wash houses take work at prices against which white people cannot compete, but if the allegations contained in a suit begun yesterday in the superior court be true, the celestials find the business a very profitable one—worth about $2,000 a year net. The suit is that of Charley Wan Lee against Lem Quie, alias Wan Lee, Lip Quich, Wan Gook, and Lin Lue. Charley alleges that he and Lem Quie formed a parole partnership some twenty years ago to conduct a laundry business. On June 16, 1887, their laundry and the books of account were burned. After the fire, they struck a verbal balance, in which it was agreed that Lem owed Charley $1,300. The partnership continued, and the firm built a laundry at the corner of Fourth and Main streets. Charley returned to China for two and a half years, leaving Lem in charge. Charley alleges that the business remained prosperous, netting over $5,100 during his absence, but Lem has refused to account for these profits or allow an inspection of the books. Charley has petitioned the court for a receiver to be appointed to secure his share of the business, back debts, and rental income collected by Lem from tenants in the building.
“It has been a long standing complaint that the Chinese wash houses take work at prices against which white people cannot compete.”
This 1892 lawsuit highlights the historical economic role of Chinese-owned laundries in Seattle. These small businesses were vital to the city's infrastructure, yet they were frequently the target of xenophobic public rhetoric—a paradox where they were simultaneously resented for their competitive pricing and recognized as successful, essential enterprises.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.