The Stolen Petition That Could Have Split Spokane County
In 1883, a push to carve a new county out of Spokane turned ugly when a 350-name petition vanished from a Howard Street law office.
It is well known that for some time past petitions have been numerously signed in this city and vicinity praying the legislature that the present county of Spokane be divided. Parties have worked zealously to have the documents circulated, and the success that has accompanied their efforts has been very flattering. The question has been presented to every man solicited for his signature in a fair light. No underhanded means has been resorted to in order to influence people, nor has any quibbling been used in swelling the list. Everything pertaining to the object has been conducted openly and above board.
As a matter of course the same activity has been displayed by Cheneyites in order to secure a remonstrance to neutralize the effect of our petition. In just how they have conducted their part of the work we are not prepared to say, but presume they have acted honestly—a presumption that is giving them the benefit of the doubt when their conduct in further transactions of like nature are considered. Collectively, they may have cherished a desire to proceed honorably, but some member of the community, a graduate in the school of knavery, has been guilty of an infamous act that brings discredit upon Cheney, and awakens a suspicion that nothing but rottenness can come out of that place.
Last Monday, and for several days prior to that date, the largest of the several petitions was kept at Hyde & Stoll's law office, on Howard street. It was there because the office is centrally located and was near at hand for those desiring to add their names to the list. Those having charge of the document never dreamed of it being in danger, entertaining no desire themselves to resort to disreputable means for furthering the object in view, and therefore did not consider it necessary to keep the list under lock and key. Monday morning by 8 o'clock several names were added to the petition. About half an hour afterward Mayor Glover desired to secure another signature, when lo and behold the petition was missing. The fact was soon noised about and created much indignation.
It is hard for us to believe that the party accused of the theft is guilty, although the evidence is strong against him. That it was some one that is an enemy to this city there can be no doubt, yet we are not ready to charge any one with so despicable an act, and especially one in whom we have heretofore placed explicit confidence. The petition was several feet in length and contained some three hundred and fifty names. Not satisfied with this robbery, the same party, or an accomplice, proceeded to the Opera House and purloined from the hotel another petition containing thirty or forty names.
Instead of strengthening the cause of the opposition, we believe that the disreputable proceeding will rebound upon the heads of the perpetrators and hasten that which they are endeavoring to prevent. Among honorable men this procedure will meet with the contempt it merits, and any remonstrance emanating from parties in sympathy with that system of bolstering up a policy will be treated with suspicion. If our legislators are of that class of men that we believe they are, we feel satisfied that the chances for success are many fold greater now than ever.
“About half an hour afterward Mayor Glover desired to secure another signature, when lo and behold the petition was missing.”
The 1883 fight turned on the same questions that still drive county splits and annexations: who pays for roads and bridges, how far people must travel to the county seat, and which town gets the courthouse. A stolen petition is a frontier version of a modern ballot-initiative dirty trick.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.