The City That Refused to Drink: Seattle’s Water War of 1876

At the meeting of the Council last week, the proposition of the local water company for providing a larger supply was withdrawn. The gist of the opposition to their proposal appears to have been mainly on two points: first, the exclusive monopoly for twenty-five years which they demanded; and second, the right to condemn private property to their uses, including the absolute control of all springs, reservoirs, and sources of water whatever within five miles of town.

They undertook to supply twenty-five gallons per diem for each inhabitant, and furnish accommodation to a height of one hundred and fifty feet (about half way up the hill) at two dollars a month per faucet, and a supply for fire purposes in consideration of a subsidy tax of three mills on the dollar of assessed valuation within the fire limits. The terms seemed tolerably fair and as reasonable as could be expected in the light of existing premises.

Nevertheless, they do not seem altogether to meet the requirements of the case, and in the very nature of things, the two objectionable features mentioned were bound to raise unlimited friction and hostility. It is said that the necessary works on the scale proposed will cost $45,000, and that the interest and operating expenses ($9,000) will exceed the income possible at the stipulated rates ($4,800), by $4,200, the first year with no tangible prospect of any great improvement the next or following years. This is too great a sacrifice to ask of individual citizens.

What we want as soon as it can be accomplished is a copious supply from Cedar River. Farmers near town and suburban residents do not like to have their springs and private water privileges interfered with. Such rights, though not held in fee simple or by indenture, are property of the most valuable kind, and to confiscate them without ample compensation would be robbery and unconstitutional.

In other towns, twenty-five gallons per diem for each inhabitant is not thought to be sufficient. When the Croton Aqueduct and distributing system were built, it was thought that not more than thirty-six gallons daily to each inhabitant would ever be used, and upon that estimate the system of mains was arranged, but they were soon found to lie too small. The average daily consumption of water in New York in 1870 was 85,000,000 gallons; in 1873 it was 104,000,000 gallons, or one hundred and four gallons per inhabitant daily. The Washington city works have a capacity to supply about six hundred gallons daily per head.

Three things, the public health, safety, and economical necessity imperatively demand a system of water-works for this city. If a private monopoly be unacceptable, it would seem that the matter must be indefinitely postponed or else the city must build them, by issuing interest-bearing city bonds to the amount of the estimated cost. As has been stated, the saving in insurance would offset the interest; and the enhanced value present and prospective of city property through their construction would more than counterbalance the principal of their cost.