The Great Canal Scheme Blocked
A judge strikes down a law that would have allowed private contractors to dig the Lake Washington canal and seize tide lands for profit.
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.
The tide land improvement law, for the passage of which the last legislature and Eugene Semple worked so untiringly, was yesterday declared unconstitutional by Judge Langley. Unless the supreme court is of a different opinion, Mr. Semple's scheme to dig the Lake Washington canal through the hills just south of the city, and for filling up the tide flats with the excavated earth, will not receive much further consideration. The decision was made in the injunction suit of Watson Allen, an owner of lands through which the proposed ditch would pass, against W. T. Forrest, state land commissioner. The new law provided that the commissioner could make light contracts with private parties and grant them a lien upon the tide lands for the cost of the improvement plus 15 per cent profit. Judge Langley held that the state could not arbitrarily divest individuals of their rights, and that the grant of the right to purchase was a vested interest that the state was bound to honor.
“An arbitrary legislative hat that divests the individual of a vested right is not law, and the courts should never enforce it as such.”
This decision halted a speculative land-grab disguised as a public utility project. Today, battles over the Lake Washington Ship Canal and the development of the city's shoreline remain central to Seattle’s identity, echoing the tension between private profit and public stewardship.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.