The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-03-10

US materially In the business OF street cleaning.
Give us enough mains, of a proper capacity,
and we shall be able to open the culverts and
let How OF water do what our Street Clean
ing Bureau spends one million dollars year
IN not doing at all. Cleanliness, comfort,
health and safety oil prompt liberal policy in
the extension of the Croton mains and wise
forethought in the increase and improvement
OF the original supply. We ought now to
make preparations for the water supply of
city of two millions of inhabitants for in this
respect there is no danger Of going ahead too
rapidly General Porter cannot turn his
attention to more important branch of the
department now under his control
The st. Andrews Church Gala mity-
The Close OF tho Inquest and the
Duty Of the Mayor.
Now that the Coroner's jury have closed
their inquiry into the ST. Andrews church
calamity, it is to be presumed that Mayor
Wickham will no longer postpone the removal
OF the Superintendent of the Building Depart
ment Although the verdict was not rem
dered yesterday the facts are before the pub
lie, and the admirable charge of the Coroner
will, we trust, have an appropriate answer.
The person who at present fills the Super
intendency is not only responsible for
this particular accident but is, by his own
showing, 80 ignorant of his duty under the
law regulating his department as to make his
retention in Office single day public out
rage. We have only to refer to portion of
his remarkable testimony at the inquest to
prove this fact. 81 have no more right to
enter mans building and to throw down its
walls or chimney than ] have to take his
pocketbook from him." said this model Super
intendent to the jury, and he further testi-
fed that he did not see the particular re-
port of the inspector of the Duane street
district, in which the dangerous condition of
the Shaw building was officially brought to
| the notice Of his department. Now, the law
under which the Superintendent acts is very
explicit in its provisions in regard to the So
curing or removing of unsafe buildings or
parts of buildings, and under it the Superin-
tendent has ample power to do the very act
which he claims would put him on par
with pickpocket or highway robber. Sec
quires the department, on building being
docketed as unsafe, to serve notice on the
parties in interest requiring the same to be
made safe and secure, or removed, as the same
may be deemed necessary by the said depart
ment.' This renders it incumbent on the
Superintendent to satisfy himself, in the first
place, as to the actual condition of the building.
so as to know whether it is necessary to notify
the owners to 'remove" it, or only to make it
''safe and secure" In this case the notice
to the owner was to make ''safe and secure"
and not to "remove" This, we insist, was
the first gross neglect of duty on the part
of the Superintendent The report of the
was based, stated that the wall on the west
side of the burned Shaw building was 'unsafe
and dangerous" inasmuch as it was GLADLY
sprung and bulged." This wall was one hun
dred feet long and ninety-si1 feet high, with
large beam holes in it, the beams having
burned out and ''badly sprung and bulged"
| The Superintendent admits that he never ex-
amined it himself; that he went to the ruins,
but only looked at them from the top of the
adjoining hotel and did not notice the west
wall at all yet he thought it sufficient to
notify the owners to SNAKE it safe and
secure, without requiring them to remove"
it. The manner in which the safety and Sc
curity were insured is shown in the death of
five persons and the manning of several
others.
| Section 81 of the same law limits the per-
sons receiving the notice to twelve o'clock
noon Of the following day to signify their
readiness to comply with its requirements.
If they fell to do so, that and the following
section specify how the work is to be done by
the Building Department and how the ex-
pense is to be met The preliminary pro-
| ceedings, made necessary by the law, limit
the loss of time. at the outside, to four days,
after which the Superintendent can proceed
| legally with the work, without fear of being
| held liable for an offence of the grade of
pocket picking. But if the owners signify
their readiness to comply with the notice the
duty and responsibility Of the Building De-
partment do not end. 1t is the duty of the
| Superintendent, STILL to see that the work is
forthwith and effectively done The accident
itself is proof that either in the original
notice. which failed to require the removal"
of the unsafe and dangerous wall, or in sub
sequent vigilance in seeing that the work of
making safe and secure was properly done,
the head Of the Building Department has
criminally violated his official duty.
The act that the present Superintendent
considers equal to the robbery of pocket
book has been frequently performed by his
predecessors. who we're without any such legal
powers as he possesses. In 1868 Wilson's
cracker bakery on Fulton street was burned.
The walls and chimneys, left standing, were
pulled down by the Superintendent of Build
ings Chief Decker of the Fire Department
| furnishing ropes hooks and ladders The