The Free-Water Fight and the 'Idle Single Men'
A proposal to give the Seattle Industrial Co-operative Society free water for two months set off a council debate over poverty, manhood, and who deserved public help.
In the house of delegates the report of the committee on fire and water, proposing to allow the Seattle Industrial Co-operative Society free water for February and March, caused considerable discussion. Messrs. James, Voigt and Chapman voted against the adoption of the report, and Messrs. Crichton, Little, Hurd and Gleeson voted affirmatively.
Voigt said he was strongly opposed to giving free water to the society or to any one else and said he would vote against the adoption of the report. Hurd, chairman of the committee, stated that he and the committee had worked hard on the matter, and after a great deal of deliberation concluded that the city would be doing the right thing in granting these men this request. He said that they had to carry their water from a well two blocks from their quarters, and that, as the water was none too good, the men were subject to disease, and would then be a great care on the city and county.
James was loud in his denunciation of the adoption of this report and said he thought there were too many idle single men in the city, and the sooner they got out the better. He said: 'Just imagine 125 able-bodied men asking that water be given them. Why didn't they send a squad of them each day out to the lake or somewhere else after it? If a woman is poor and has a large family, I am always in favor of helping her with free water or anything else, but I am strongly opposed to giving free water to these men.'
The question was called for by Hurd and the report adopted by a vote of four to three.
James then moved that all patrons be granted free water for February and March, but the motion was lost. James moved to adjourn; lost. James then arose to a point of order, that by adopting the report the council would be taking money out of the treasury. Chairman Crichton was not sure about the point of order, and referred the report to the judiciary committee, with the request that the committee draw up an ordinance and secure the corporation counsel's opinion before submitting it.
““Just imagine 125 able-bodied men asking that water be given them.””
The argument that only 'deserving' poor people—especially women with children—should receive public help, while unattached men are dismissed as idle, is still a staple of debates over homelessness, utility assistance, and welfare. The 1895 vote also shows how a small public-water subsidy could become a fight over who belongs in the city.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.