The Great Seattle Land Battle of 1877
A federal decision sheds light on the messy early scramble for ownership of downtown Seattle, as speculators and the city vied for title to the waterfront.
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.
Department of the Interior, General Land Office, Washington D.C., Jan 12, 1877. The office has examined the testimony in the contested case of the city of Seattle vs. Hugh McAleer, Frederick A. Minick, Edgar W. Blake, Ephraim Calvert, and Chas. C. Rich, pre-emptors, the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, and Thomas B. Valentine, scrip claimant, involving the title to lands in Sections 4, 5, 8, and 9. The city of Seattle filed application May 22, 1875, to enter several lots, all of which were incorporated as part of the city. However, the testimony does not show that these tracts have been used for municipal purposes—only a corral attached to a slaughterhouse, a cemetery, and the houses of pre-emptors. Commissioner J.A. Williamson ruled that a town laid out upon private property is not entitled to make an entry of adjoining public land as a townsite unless it is actually occupied for the purposes of trade. Consequently, the city's application was rejected. The claims of McAleer, Minick, Rich, Blake, and Calvert were also held for cancellation due to disqualifications and illegal filings. The application of Valentine to locate his scrip on the tracts in Section 4 is rejected, as the land, being within the incorporated limits of a city, is excluded from pre-emption and homestead entry.
“It is clear to my mind that a town laid out upon private property is not entitled by virtue of any number of inhabitants to make an entry of adjoining public land as a town site.”
This 1877 battle over who owns the dirt of Seattle—and whether it should serve the public or private speculators—echoes perfectly in today's debates over public land use, density, and the city's role in housing affordability. Then, as now, the struggle over downtown Seattle's footprint defined the city's future trajectory.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.