The Mayor's Change of Heart on Prohibition
Seattle Mayor Hiram Gill publicly disavows his 'wet' past, citing the positive social impact of the state's dry laws.
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.
Hiram Gill, mayor of Seattle, recently discussing the wet measures to be voted on in November, said: 'Since the first day of January, I have not had a woman in my office crying and saying that her husband had not turned in any money for months. There used to be four or five a day. There is, it is true, a considerable number of liquor permits taken out. It is legitimate under the law, but the aggregate of liquor bought under permits so far would not equal one-half of one per cent of the consumption before the state went dry. I write this as one who is ashamed to admit that he voted 'wet' and will not repeat the mistake. I have yet to find the first person engaged in legitimate business in this city or owner of premises which had been used for the sale of liquor who is not in favor of the present law, or one more stringent.'
“I write this as one who is ashamed to admit that he voted 'wet' and will not repeat the mistake.”
Mayor Hiram Gill’s pivot from 'wet' to 'dry' captures the volatile social climate of pre-Prohibition Washington. His framing of the issue—focusing on economic stability for families—is a classic example of how moral crusades were often packaged as matters of public fiscal responsibility.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.