The Birth Pangs of Washington’s Constitution
As the territory prepared for statehood in 1889, the local press scrutinized the new constitution, exposing the tension between civic optimism and the looming shadow of corporate greed.
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.
The constitutional convention held in Olympia has completed its work. It can be said that while it is not perfect, it is fairly free from the influence of corruption. Every effort was given to preserve its spirit, and every point of the law was told intelligently. While the judgment of the convention has not been in tune with what some journals thought to be the best policy, there is no doubt that the judgment as it stands is in all honesty, and on the whole, it is remarkably free from the bias of local and private interest.
The danger in constitution-making is to put in too much, to depart from principles and go into systems. The mistakes of the convention lie chiefly in its failure to define the policy of the state regarding its tide-land property, in its provision practically confiscating the landed property of aliens, and in its failure to establish a practical plan for the control of railroads. The first of these, relating to tide lands, will result in the hindrance of enterprise in many ways and in great loss to the state. The second, relative to alien land ownership, will be corrected by the courts. The third, relative to railroads, will be a fruitful source of business damage and political corruption. These matters are to be seriously regretted, but they appear only as blemishes compared with the general excellence of the constitution.
“The danger in constitution-making is to put in too much, to depart from principles and go into systems.”
In 1889, Seattle was grappling with the tension between private development and public benefit—a conflict that remains at the heart of the city's current battles over land use and housing. The paper’s fear that the constitution would fail to curb corporate influence mirrors today's ongoing debates about how municipal and state charters protect citizens from the interests of large developers.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.