The Battle Over Seattle’s Tide Lands
A federal decision in 1889 confirms that tide lands in Washington Territory are federal property, opening the door for 'Valentine scrip' land grabs.
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.
Following a recent decision by the Department of the Interior, reversing the decision of the local land office in rejecting the application of Frank Burns Jr. to locate Valentine scrip on tide lands in Washington Territory, the potential for land speculation on the Seattle waterfront has grown. The Acting Commissioner of the General Land Office determined that such tide lands are public lands of the United States, that they are not mineral lands, that they are subject to disposal by the United States, and that they are unoccupied and unappropriated. Consequently, the claimant has the right to locate his scrip thereon. This ruling essentially clarifies that until the state is formally admitted to the Union, these submerged lands remain under federal jurisdiction and can be sold or granted off to private parties.
“I am therefore of the opinion that the lands in question are public lands of the United States, that they are not mineral lands, that they are subject to disposal by the United States.”
Long before today's high-rise waterfront disputes, 19th-century Seattle was defined by intense legal battles over the ownership of tide lands. This federal ruling of 1889 essentially paved the way for private developers to claim the very ground upon which much of downtown Seattle was eventually built, echoing contemporary anxieties about who owns, controls, and benefits from the city's most valuable shoreline real estate.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.