Seattle Lawyers Debate Martial Law and Mob Violence
In a tense meeting, the King County Bar Association condemns the recent anti-Chinese expulsions and debates whether to censure lawyers involved in the agitation.
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.
At the meeting of the Seattle Bar, held at the court chambers, a committee was appointed to investigate charges against members of the bar who had allegedly misbehaved during the recent agitation. After considerable debate, the association adopted resolutions condemning the mob violence that had sought to expel the Chinese from Seattle on February 7th and 8th. The resolutions stated that the events were an unparalleled stain upon the city, and that the declaration of martial law was fully justified. George Venable Smith, the lone dissenter, opposed the resolutions on the grounds that the language was too strong and would only act as a firebrand in a community already inflamed by passion.
“I would rather live under the Czar of all the Russians, than to live under mob law, no matter by whom conducted or controlled.”
This meeting captures the deep fracture in Seattle's legal and civic community following the 1886 anti-Chinese riots. Today, this incident serves as a grim reminder of how Seattle's civic leaders navigated the tension between established rule of law and the violent, xenophobic populism that reshaped the city’s demographics and labor landscape.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.