The Chief of Police’s Private Vendetta
Seattle’s police chief is under fire for allegedly using his badge to smear a peaceful citizen through fabricated letters and baseless professional surveillance.
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 conduct of Chief James H. Woolery is both suspicious and rightfully criticized. The City Council will meet this evening, and it is hoped that Mr. Woolery will be held to an account of his affairs. The people have a right to an explanation of his recent strange actions; if any explanation can be given. If Mr. Woolery does not demand a retraction of the statements made by those who have challenged him, he fails to institute a defense. The matter should be within their jurisdiction. Mr. Woolery has not acted here as a private citizen, but as an official. He has used the powers of his position to obtain information, which as a private citizen he could not obtain; and this information he has spread to us, not for the public good, but for purposes best known to himself. Further, Mr. Woolery has stated above his official seal that he has letters from Salt Lake, from Corvallis and from Vancouver, giving Mr. Manke 'a very bad name.' We do not believe that he has any such letters. The reason for this belief is that Mr. Manke has never been anywhere near Salt Lake City. The attorney of the man will pursue the letters, knowing they cannot sustain the accusation. Chief Woolery has meddled in the private affairs of a reputable citizen, and has made a statement prejudicial to the character of that citizen. It should be borne in mind, it was not made by James H. Woolery as a private citizen, but by James H. Woolery as Chief of Police. A citizen chooses to live in this city and takes up his residence here. Pursuing a career, he resides among us, living as a quiet, peaceable citizen. He does not ask for justice, but for police non-interference in his affairs. No complaints are made against him; he commits no breach of the peace; there is no reason to believe that he contemplates the breaking of any law.
“He has used the powers of his position to obtain information, which as a private citizen he could not obtain; and this information he has spread to us, not for the public good, but for purposes best known to himself.”
This 1885 editorial highlights a classic Seattle struggle: the tension between a growing city’s police power and the civil liberties of its residents. Long before modern debates over surveillance and police accountability, the local press was acting as a check against officials using public resources to conduct private, retaliatory investigations.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.