The Laundry Alibi
A Seattle laborer stands accused of a brutal hatchet attack, but his defense claims he was nowhere near the scene, pointing to his wife’s workplace as his only destination.
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 examination of S. W. Burns, charged with having assaulted Krust at Seattle with a hatchet New Year's night for the purpose of robbery, was concluded in Justice Hill's court yesterday. The defense consisted of the testimony of Burns and his wife in an endeavor to prove an alibi, and the testimony of two or three persons to Burns' moral character. Burns admitted entering the Dew Drop Inn beer hall a minute or so before Butler and Yulice, but claimed that he had just come from the laundry on Mill Street, where his wife works, reaching the beer hall by way of Front Street. Judge Hill, after listening to all the testimony, bound Burns over in the sum of $500 to appear before the next Grand Jury.
“Burns admitted entering the Dew Drop Inn beer hall a minute or so before Butler and Yulice, but claimed that he had just come from the laundry on Mill Street, where his wife works.”
This case highlights the precariousness of working-class survival in 1886 Seattle, where proximity to crime scenes—like the notorious beer halls near the waterfront—often outweighed character evidence. Today, Mill Street (now Yesler Way) and the waterfront remain central to the city's complex debates over public safety and justice.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.