The Decades-Long Battle for the McAleer Tract Ends in Court
After years of tangled legal claims, Judge Hanford rules against the McAleer heirs, clearing the way for new development on a large, vacant stretch of land once visible from the old Lake Washington cable cars.
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.
Judge Hanford, in chambers yesterday, decided the old and celebrated case of the heirs of Hugh McAleer vs. W.C. Hill, which involved the title of the valuable tract of land known as the W.C. Hill tract, south of the school. The action was brought by the McAleer heirs against W.C. Hill to have him declared trustee, under his patent from the government, for their benefit. A demurrer to the complaint filed by the defendant, Hill, was sustained by Judge Hanford yesterday. The McAleer heirs claimed that Hugh McAleer had bought the land from David S. Maynard and his wife, Catharine T. Maynard, and had made improvements to the value of $7,000. Twelve years later, the general land office in Washington cancelled the donation certificate of Catharine T. Maynard without notice. McAleer's subsequent attempts to file a pre-emption claim or a homestead filing were refused, and Hill later filed Forest lieu scrip on the land. The court held that the commissioner of the general land office had the right to cancel the certificate, and therefore, neither McAleer nor his heirs could claim anything under the deed. Judge Hanford, who had previously argued the same legal proposition for the plaintiffs while in private practice, stated he felt constrained to decide the other way as a judge. It is expected that this will end the long, tedious litigation and that the land will finally be developed as a residence section of the city. Mr. Hill, who is in Washington D.C., is expected to return to Seattle to commence extensive improvements.
“Judge Hanford stated, in making his opinion, that for several years he had argued the same proposition maintained by the attorneys for McAleer's heirs, both here and at Washington; but now, as judge, he felt constrained to decide the other way.”
This 1889 legal battle over land title and the displacement of early residents to make way for 'residence sections' perfectly mirrors the recurring tension in Seattle’s history between grassroots homesteading and the consolidation of land for large-scale development. Just as the McAleer tract was once a 'large body of vacant land' at the center of a boom-era struggle, today's debates over property rights, density, and displacement remain at the heart of the city's growth.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.