Same Streets
← All stories

Starvation Wages and a Broken Light Contract: Seattle's Lower House Erupts

Delegates demand answers on Pike Street paving, city jobs parceled out by foremen, Kilbourne Avenue subcontracting, and the gas-electric company's failure to light the city.

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.

In the house of delegates a report was taken up and the committees on public works and the city came in for a large share of attention. Hurd asked the city engineer what was being done and paid for the paving of Pike street. He said the street was in a terrible condition and some action should be taken. If given the desired information, Little said that the corporation owning the streetcar companies was in the hands of a receiver, and every advantage would be taken to delay action.

James said he thought something should be done, and if the city engineer with all his help could not get up a plan to pave the street, it was time to get another man. He said: "We have been a good share of a year talking about this thing and it seems to me it is time for some action. All we need is a plan. The style of pavement has been decided upon, and it does seem as if the city engineer could prepare a plan. Already the committee on claims has heard from this street. There is a fault somewhere, but I believe the committee has done conscientious work in this matter."

"I agree with Mr. James," said Chapman. "There is a screw loose somewhere. It seems to be easy to have things pigeon-holed. Things are wrong. We hear of prisoners eating turkey and fattening at the expense of the city. They should be set to work."

The doctor switched from his subject to telling how the newspapers gave columns to a kangaroo court, and how the women expected to see the "ladies' entrance" to saloons closed in a week, but it was not done. This led to the labor question and, after a fiery talk with no dissenting voice, the president of the board of delegates was instructed to call on the board of public works for information as to the city laborers.

Dr. Chapman said: "I have been astounded by the audacious confidence of these men who have control of the city work. I think it is time to call for information as to who is getting this work. I know that many needy, honest, deserving citizens with families are not. These men just pigeon-hole applications approved by the city foremen. How can such men expect to be confirmed when they are not in sympathy with the council?"

He then spoke of the Co-operative Industrial Association, and said he did not want to be hard on them, but thought these men, instead of asking assistance from citizens, had better go to the Salvation Army headquarters and saw wood for their meals.

Little, Chapman and James spoke at length on the pernicious practices arising out of the sub-letting system used on street grade work. Kilbourne avenue, it was claimed, was where men worked at starvation wages, and it formed the principal point around which the discussion played. Chapman and James were appointed a committee to investigate the matter and see if the law could reach such cases.

Goodhue called attention to the negligence of the city in having fifty water hydrants stored in a vacant lot for a year or so when the most important streets in the city were lacking in a sufficient number of hydrants.

The adoption of a committee report allowing A. Heartley $25 for giving information that led to the capture of Thomas Blanck caused a discussion in which James used some very plain language to Attorney Fred Peterson. Dr. Chapman said that the committee thought $25 was all the city could afford to give the boy for his services. The report was adopted and about to be sent to the aldermen when Attorney Fred Peterson said Mr. Heartley would not accept the amount and desired to know why it was worded so that the boy's getting all the money was a proviso.

"I don't know as it interests Mr. Peterson," said James. "The boy was at my house and I understood he was willing to accept that amount. He also left a note to that effect on my desk."

"I desire to state," said Mr. Peterson, "that my services have been gratuitous."

"I understand," said Mr. James, "although Mr. Peterson's name was not mentioned, that the boy was to pay an attorney's fee of $15."

"I am not responsible for what the boy may say," put in Mr. Peterson. "My services were gratuitous."

"No one would charge a boy a fee in such a matter," said Dr. Chapman, and the matter was dropped.

Hurd took a shy at the light question, and so wrathy were the members of the house at the way things were going that they passed the following concurrent resolution unanimously: "Whereas, many complaints are being made that the Seattle Gas Electric Light company is not complying with its contract for lighting the city, and that the light service rendered by the Seattle Gas Electric Light company in that portion of the city covered by its contract is inefficient; now, therefore, be it resolved by the house of delegates, the board of aldermen concurring, that the board of public works be, and they are hereby instructed to immediately inform the city council as to whether the Seattle Gas Electric Light company has caused the additional lights provided for to be installed, and whether the said company is complying with its contract with the city in the furnishing of light."

“I have been astounded by the audacious confidence of these men who have control of the city work.”

— Printed in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895
Then · 1895131 years apartNow · 2026

The debate over who gets city work—and whether contractors can subcontract at starvation wages—is an ancestor of today's fights over public-works accountability and utility contracts. The demand to know who benefits from city money is a very Seattle argument.

The original page

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-02-05. Library of Congress, Chronicling America.

From readers

No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.

About this story

From
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, FEB 5, 1895, Page 8
Rights
Public domain
Place
47.60323, -122.33028 · placed automatically
The paper in the Library of Congress catalog ↗