The Battle Over Seattle's Ten-Acre University Landmark
A spirited defense of the board’s refusal to sell the original university grounds in downtown Seattle for a 'trifle.'
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.
John Arthur, a member of the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners, writes to the editor to defend the board against criticisms from State Auditor Thomas M. Reed regarding the refusal to sell the ten-acre university tract in downtown Seattle. Arthur argues that the legislature never commanded the board to sell the old site, only to build the new university. He explains that selling the land during the financial depression of 1891 would have resulted in 'criminal waste,' fetching far below its potential half-million-dollar value. Arthur contends that the land, located in the heart of the city, should be held until it increases in value with the growing population, suggesting that the state should look to its congressional land grants to fund the new campus instead of sacrificing the historic downtown site.
“This ten-acre tract is the most valuable piece of property which the state possesses.”
This debate over the original University of Washington site (now the Metropolitan Tract) highlights the city's early struggle between public educational assets and private real-estate development. The tension between holding public land for long-term value versus immediate liquidation is a recurring theme in modern urban planning.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.