Same Streets
← All stories

The Women of Washington Take Their Seats on the Jury

While critics claimed jury duty was 'disagreeable' for women, the first female jurors in Pierce County report they served willingly and effectively.

Jury duty is not pleasant to merchants, capitalists, mechanics, editors, and other men of business. It is repugnant to them, and is avoided on every possible occasion. The conclusions are purely personal, practically all do, and are not often heeded. Of all men, they are the least jurors. But the objection of assessment will hold good with women. They do not want to serve any more than men of business do, and they make jurors of the first character. They will never be found making any John, and if called will generally serve, not of passion but of profit, and if duty is one, will be conscientious. Men selected for juries have all kinds of objections, presumably as businessmen do, but in truth many of them have served and will want to dodge when not personally interested. That they will do in the law and justice cannot be doubted. A loud howl has gone up from the opponents of the innovation. One of this kind fortunately called forth the publication of the communication following. We may add that the experience of the women of Tacoma, as told by themselves, has been that of the women of Seattle and other places where mixed juries have been tried: 'Tacoma, W.T., July 1, 1884. Editor New Northwest: The following assertion appeared in the Walla Walla Union of June 21st: 'Jury duty has been found exceedingly disagreeable and irksome by the women of Puget Sound.' We, the jurors of the last term of court for Pierce County, held at Tacoma, wish to contradict the statement, as far as we are concerned. We found our duties neither irksome nor disagreeable, but rather the contrary. Some of us would have been engaged for the best of reasons, had we sought such privilege. The petit jury was fourteen hours in deliberation on one case, and twenty-four hours on another; and there were more complaints from the men than from the women. We served cheerfully and willingly, and are ready, should a similar call be made upon us, to do so again. Mrs. Frances Barlow, Mrs. Janet E. Fuller, Mrs. D. E. Lester, Mrs. Elizabeth Munroe, Mrs. Eliza J. Ross, Mrs. M. J. Gilliber, Grand Jurors. Mrs. L. H. Gosnell, Mrs. S. O. Fay, Mrs. A. J. Flagg, Mrs. J. A. Westover, Mrs. E. C. Bradish Mann, Petit Jurors.'

“We found our duties neither irksome nor disagreeable, but rather the contrary.”

— Printed in Seattle Daily Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884
Then · 1884142 years apartNow · 2026

This piece highlights the 1883-1887 period in Washington Territory when women served on juries before the territorial supreme court revoked the right. It captures a pivotal moment in the fight for gender equality in civic life that mirrors contemporary debates over who belongs in the halls of justice.

The original page

Seattle Daily Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-07-06. Library of Congress, Chronicling America.

From readers

No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.

About this story

From
Seattle Daily Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, JUL 6, 1884, Page 4
Text
Cleaned up from the page — spelling and layout repaired — not a word-for-word transcription. The page itself is above, for exact wording.
Rights
Public domain
Place
47.24550, -122.43833 · placed automatically
The paper in the Library of Congress catalog ↗