The Tide-Land Grab
As Washington prepares to become a state, newspaper editors fight a shadowy campaign by land speculators to seize public tidelands before the new constitution can protect them.
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.
It will be the effort of the grabbers to prevent the constitutional convention which meets in July from taking action upon the tide-land question. They argue that this convention has nothing to do with matters of administration; that the questions involved belong wholly to the administrative department of government, and therefore come under the jurisdiction of the legislature. Already this idea is being circulated and with such industry and vigor, such a systematic plan, as to indicate that the grabbers' organization has already begun its work.
The anxiety of the grabbers to postpone this matter may easily be explained. If the convention shall incorporate in the constitution a tide-land policy in accord with the interests of the state, then the game is up. On the other hand, if the question shall be left open, then if one legislature cannot be 'worked,' another may be. In the first instance the interests of the people will be permanently protected; in the other, they will be left subject to continued assault.
We hold it to be the duty of the constitutional convention to fix definitely the policy of the state respecting its large inheritance of tide-lands from the government. Otherwise this great property will be left in such position that the state may lose it. Ordinary business prudence demands protection of this property at the very beginning of state rule. It would hold wide open the door that leads to commerce. With the front of our commercial cities in the hands of individuals, there will be a perpetual tax upon commerce, heavy enough to reflect itself in the products of every citizen who buys what comes by the sea.
“With the front of our commercial cities in the hands of individuals, there will be a perpetual tax upon commerce.”
In 1889, as Washington transitioned to statehood, the battle over public vs. private control of Seattle's industrial waterfront was a defining civic conflict. Today, that same tension over public access, private development, and the 'perpetual tax' of high living costs continues to shape Seattle’s waterfront and housing debates.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.