The County Seat Was in the Courtroom
Defendants in a Snohomish debt suit tried to derail the case by arguing the county seat had moved to Everett—and that the court was therefore sitting in the wrong place.
EVERETT, April 25.—Special.—The question of the jurisdiction of the superior court of Snohomish County was raised in connection with the county seat case at Snohomish yesterday. The case was a suit brought by the Everett National Bank against the Everett Mosaic Tile Company et al. Attorneys for the defendant raised the question of jurisdiction, alleging in an affidavit that the county seat was at Everett, and the court had no right to transact business outside of the county seat. In support of the objection the attorneys filed copies of the records in the county commissioners' office, including the order directing that the question of the removal of the county seat be submitted to the people, the result of the canvassing board and the order of the commissioners directing that the county seat be removed. Court overruled the objection and granted an exception. An appeal will be at once taken to the supreme court, and as this is a motion it is likely to get an early hearing.
“The county seat was at Everett, and the court had no right to transact business outside of the county seat.”
County-seat fights were about money, prestige and control of courthouse jobs; today's equivalents are regional fights over where public facilities, transit lines and administrative headquarters land. The legal wrinkle—whether a court can act if the county seat has moved—shows how deeply geography is written into civic authority.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.