This paper examines the relationship between daily urban conflicts and the role of municipal government during the Constitutional Revolution (1906-1911). Most scholarship on the history of petitioning in late Qajar Iran has fixated on petitions to either the king or the parliament (majlis) as the source of redress. On the other hand, studies of subaltern populations during the Constitutional Revolution have usually focused on their political mobilization and their collective representation in revolutionary discourses. This overtly political emphasis of the constitutional period has impeded a more careful study of the everyday experiences of non-elites during the revolution. Less has been said on how urban populations, especially guildsmen, small merchants, women, and the marginalized poor, petitioned the municipal government to resolve disputes, seek redress for perceived injustices, and ask for material support in times of economic distress. Ordinary Iranians in urban centers often understood the function of provincial and municipal councils (anjumans) as associations responsible for addressing petitions rather than as forums for implementing modernizing reforms. This popular understanding of the constitutional order as new forum for redress instead of a radically new form of government was evident in the initial demand by protesters in Tehran for a “house of justice” (‘idalatkhanah) that would more effectively respond to petitions. As a result, the proceedings of municipal and provincial councils—and even the Iranian parliament itself—are rich sources for the study of everyday life during the Constitutional Revolution. Using petitions, letters to the editor, and the proceedings of municipal and provincial anjumans in Tehran, Tabriz, and Isfahan, this paper examines the everyday social and economic concerns of ordinary people and the mechanisms for local redress in urban centers. Local and provincial anjumans were faced with petitions regarding conflicts between guilds, complaints about the collection of taxes, concerns over the lack of safety and security, and the high prices and scarcity of staple goods such as bread and wheat. Petitioners included coffeehouse owners, shopkeepers, butchers, bakers, urban guildsmen, the destitute, and even the urban police seeking their wages. This paper argues that the popular engagement with constitutionalism often took the form of petitions to municipal and provincial anjumans. Ordinary urban dwellers viewed these anjumans as alternative sources of power to the king and local and provincial governors capable of redistributing economic resources, adjudicating disputes between guilds, providing relief from excessive taxes, and providing economic relief to the poor and the marginalized.