The Unlikely Sweep of 1880
When King County became the 'banner county' for the GOP, local editors credited a clean campaign and a rejection of the 'mud-slinging' tactics of their rivals.
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 re-election of Mr. Brents is ensured, and by an increased majority. This result is unquestionably surprising; while he was confident of re-election, he did not himself set the figure of his majority higher than 1000. Two thousand, it is now conclusively established, will be nearer the mark. Mr. Burke is certainly a genial, agreeable, popular man, but he made his first and most grievous mistake in seeking and accepting the nomination. It gave the impression that he thought he could overcome a majority of 1300 votes in a community strongly antagonistic to his political principles. His next great mistake was in endeavoring to force an issue where none existed, but where one subsequently arose against him—the question of State government. But his mortal hurt came from his friends, who were intemperate in conducting his campaign. Not content with advocating his election, they must abuse his opponent. The weighty argument of the fifteen-dollar suit was brought out. The story of the Northern Pacific land grant was invented and circulated. In every possible manner was Mr. Brents misrepresented and maligned. A selfish, sectional feeling was instituted, but a different effect from that intended was soon made manifest. The supporters of Mr. Brents were moved to greater exertions on his behalf. In King County, the Republicans swept everything before them. Not a man on their ticket was beaten, from Territorial and District candidates down to Justices and Constables of the various precincts. In fidelity to the ticket, King is probably the banner county of the Territory.
“Political sectionalism in Washington Territory is dead, and there are no mourners.”
The 1880 election report highlights a perennial Seattle political tension: the divide between 'sectional' interest and state-wide ambition. Just as 19th-century voters were swayed by debates over infrastructure and statehood, modern Seattleites continue to grapple with how local voting 'banner counties' dictate the direction of Washington’s legislative future.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.