The Editor versus the Judge
A clash between the press and the bench over a municipal dance hall ordinance sparks a contempt charge.
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.
The criticisms of the Telegraph on the manner in which Judge Glasgow, of the municipal court, has dealt with the cases under the dance house ordinance have been made the basis of proceedings for contempt of court against Charles H. Lugrin, the editor and manager of the Telegraph. The complaint alleges that Lugrin, intending to bring the administration of justice into contempt and to intimidate the judge, published an article entitled 'The Dance House Ordinance.' The article stated in part: 'Public opinion is behind the ordinance for the suppression of dance houses, and Judge Glasgow would do very well to go very slow about deciding it to be invalid. Judge Glasgow said yesterday that he did not care what the papers say about him. Probably he does not... He may, if he sees fit, set himself up as the arbiter of social conditions in Seattle. He may ally himself with all the low elements of the city.'
“He may, if he sees fit, set himself up as the arbiter of social conditions in Seattle.”
This 1894 battle mirrors ongoing tensions between local media, public morality crusades, and the independence of the municipal judiciary. The 'dance house ordinance' was part of a larger, long-running attempt by the city to regulate 'vice' and dictate the social character of the neighborhood districts.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.