The Dog in the Manger: How Seattle’s Landlords Are Killing Its Future
An editorial in the 1876 Puget Sound Dispatch warns that greedy real estate owners are pricing out workers with usurious rents, comparing their tactics to Shylock and urging them to lower prices before the city stagnates.
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.
Twenty-five years have nearly rolled around since the first settlers landed with their families on the present site of Seattle. Then it was a 'howling wilderness' so to speak; Here they found the Indian to welcome them to 'hospitable graves,' and yet most of them are still above the sod of the valley.
Behold what a change hath been wrought by the hand of man in the quarter of a century now drawing to a close. Those settlers have lived to see the city grow to its present proportions, from a few log-houses, with their inmates, to a city containing four thousand souls all told; with its churches; its public schools; its University; its public library (which should be more heartily supported), with its houses of merchandise, factories and mills. From one cabin, it has grown to be one of the largest and most important shipping ports north of San Francisco, and destined in the not far distant future to rival that sister city of the Pacific Coast.
Let the stranger but read of the wonderful resources of this city; that which made it; that which has sustained it to this hour and he will find that in her resources the city is founded upon a rock, and will continue to grow in commercial importance as the years come and go. But while this is true our real estate owners must understand that the present stagnation in business; the complete standstill to which everything has come is greatly due to their short-sighted policy in holding their lands so high that the poor man cannot secure himself a home at once on his arrival.
For as it now exists if he secures a lot at your figures 'on time' that terrible Shylock interest, that usurious interest of 18 per cent. per annum faces him like the ghost of Hamlet.
Your lands are too high, gentlemen. Give the stranger a chance for his life when he lands on your shore and sell him a home at a reasonable profit to yourselves, and not pursue any longer your present policy of 'the dog in the manger.' If you expect to see this become a city of fifty thousand people in the next fifteen years you must let up, gentlemen, on your high prices.
Instance: In 1870 Ben Holladay, in the city of Portland, paid off his railroad hands and told them to live as best they could during that winter, and in the coming spring he would assist them to something else. This created a demand for houses, and many were erected in consequence, and rents went up beyond all reason, as they are here to-day in Seattle. This increase of rents augmented values and made speculation ruled the hour, and property to-day will not average (except in choice localities) 60 per cent. of what it did then in 1870. Seattle should be warned by this example. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.
This 1876 editorial captures the exact tension defining Seattle’s housing market today: the conflict between land speculation and affordable access for new residents. The writer’s warning that 'short-sighted policy' in holding land high would cause a 'standstill' mirrors modern debates over zoning, density, and the impact of speculative development on long-term community stability.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.