The Radical Visionary of Seattle's Early Politics
Before statehood, Edward Eldridge faced local scrutiny for his 'superficial' philosophy and his radical, communal vision for Washington's future.
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.
We regret to see that the opponents of Mr. Eldridge, the Republican candidate for Delegate at Large, deem it necessary to make a fight upon him personally, upon charges long since outlawed and outlived. That he changed his name from Alexander Munroe to Edward Eldridge is a matter of public record, well known to the public. Whatever his previous acts or history may have been, Mr. Eldridge has been a citizen of this Territory for twenty years; has been elected to the Legislature several times, and held other positions of honor and trust. While we have nothing to say against the personal character of Mr. Eldridge, he is about the last man we would like to see elected as a constitution maker. He is a very superficial disciple of the school of 'advanced philosophy'—recognizing the divinity of human intelligence as the only godhead, and the devices of man as the perfection of wisdom. Their plan of government is a system of communism which practically ignores the family relation and the prevailing social regulations relating to the distinctions of sex. In his published manifesto, Mr. Eldridge proposes to make all the citizens wards of the Government; that the title to lands shall only vest in the Government to be occupied by citizens as tenants; that the Government shall have possession and control of all railroads, telegraphs and other public improvements and provide for the employment and support of all its citizens. At the millennium this plan may be practicable; but as men are constituted, it would be difficult to imagine any proposition more absurd.
“At the millennium this plan may be practicable; but as men are constituted and political parties are now organized, it would be difficult to imagine any proposition more absurd.”
Edward Eldridge’s 1878 platform—proposing state-controlled land, public ownership of infrastructure, and socialized labor—echoes modern Seattle debates over land trusts, public banking, and the role of government in housing affordability. Eldridge was essentially arguing for a version of municipal socialism that still sparks intense partisan fire in the city today.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.