The Powder Barrel Scandal: Seattle’s City Council vs. The Police Chief
A fiery public dispute over missing dynamite and unauthorized absences exposes deep friction in the Seattle city government of 1885.
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.
Councilman Yosier moved that the Council proceed to the investigation of the charges against Chief Woolery. Judge Jacobs stated that he and Jas. McNaught had been employed to defend Mr. Woolery. Mayor Leary read the report of the Committee on Health and Police, which brought the matter before the Council.
'This, gentlemen,' said the Mayor, 'is the report of a committee, and not specific charges, and I think before we can take any action specific charges should be made.'
Judge Jacobs, representing the Chief, argued that the Chief was under no obligation to act as a witness for the City Attorney before a Grand Jury. 'The complaint against Mr. Woolery is that the Chief refused to make a written complaint to be read before the Grand Jury. With all due respect to the City Attorney... neither the City Attorney nor the Mayor has any authority to direct, or control by virtue of their office, any prosecutions before the Grand Jury.'
Beyond the procedural battle, the Council debated a lingering grievance from E.F. Sot regarding a claim for powder supplied to the city. Sot claimed the city had been slow to pay, noting: 'The zeal of Mr. Lipsky to see justice done to the city is highly commendable, but it is a noteworthy fact that although the city has had to pay for two lots of powder lost or stolen from the powder house, the zealous powder house keeper is careful to demand and collect his pay, and that too without any deduction for breakage or shortage.'
“The zeal of Mr. Lipsky to see justice done to the city is highly commendable, but it is a noteworthy fact that although the city has had to pay for two lots of powder lost or stolen from the powder house, the zealous powder house keeper is careful to demand and collect his pay.”
In 1885, Seattle’s City Council was grappling with the same questions of accountability and civic ethics that define local politics today. The suspicion of 'stolen' city assets and the defiant posturing of police leadership against civilian oversight mirror the ongoing tension between municipal departments and the elected representatives who attempt to hold them accountable.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.