Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1879-08-14


A Philadelphia Judge has recently rendered
a decision to the effect that the Board OF Health
of that city has ample power to abolish bone
boiling establishments and other like health
destroying nuisanceS situated within her cor
porate limits OF course there never could have
been any serious doubts as to the existence OF
such authority, or Of the right to exercise 1t,
but the culpable parties, who held money-mak-
ing above the public health, tnterposed
bubble through which they hoped to defeat
the ends of justice. The technical preteXt set
up was, however. quickly put aside by the
Judge as the worthless excuse of ian admitted
wrong doer," and the decision was In favor OF
the Board Of Health on every point.
What is law for the protection of the public In
Philadelphia must be equally good law for the
protection OF the public in the national capital,
and there can be no doubt that either the Dis
trict Commissioners or the Health Officer, or
both, have the power, as 1t is their duty, to
suppress the asphalt coal tar boiling and all
other disease producing nuisances located In
the city of Washington.
We understand that the District Commission.
ers explain their failure to deal with these
asphalt boiling concerns on the ground, first,
that while the smell Of melting the coal-tar and
asphalt together Is unpleasant to most people,
and very offensive TO many, yet sanitary men
have decided that IT Is not injurious to health.
Second. that it Is actually necessary that these
melting establishments should be located In
the vicinity OF the streets to be improved as
the material has to be laid hot.
As regards the first OF these propositions, we
do not know who the sanitary authorities may
be who declare these concerns not uuhealthful,
but We do know that medical men Of flrst-class
standing here take the position that anything
Is Injurious to health that creates nausea, IN
settles the stomach, affects the nervous system
nnfavorably, destroys rest, &c. Thousands can
testify that the boiling nulsanceS AFFECT
them in this deleter1ous way. 1t is not neces-
sary that nuisance should be so offensive as
to absolutely breed pestilence, to make it inju-
T1ous to health. The claim made next that this
Inferno of smoke and stink must be tOler-
ated In the central portions of the city for
the convenience Of the contractors, who can
not do their work otherwise. is yet more
astonishing, especially to those who have seen
how these things are managed in other places
where citizens have some rights. In Paris, for
instance, the home Of the asphalt pavement,
what would be thought OF proposition to set
up an asphalt boiling concern in the central
part Of the city to belch out dense black smoke
and poisonous fumes like the nuisance establish
ed on north street, opposite the Smithsonian
Institution, and within a stones throw OF Penn.
sylvania avenue! Again, 1t Is said that the
District authorities have no power to control
the paving contractors In this matter II so the
fault Is with the authorities. This nuisance on
street Is an old subject Of complaint, and &C.
ergetic protests were made last year to its con-
ttnuance. 1t was promised that the concern
should be removed as soon as the contracts of
last year were completed, but the promise was
broken; the same contractors get yet larger
contracts this year, and instead OF removing
their works are absolutely enlarg1ng
them as II meaning to make a permanent
stand there. IL would have been the
easiest thing In the world for the Commission
ers to have secured control over the contractors
and the power to abate this evil by speciflca-
lions In the contracts. 1t Is alleged as further
reason why the Commissioners cannot deal
with this particular B street nuisance, that it
Is located, not on District ground, as has been
supposed, but on ground belonging to the
United States. This ground is laid reclaimed
In f1lling up the old canal; and, as the tax-pay-
ers OF Washington had to pay for the work OF
reclamation, 1t seems pretty hard that its sole
use should be the maintenance of q nuisance
most lntoleraole to them. VINO first gave the
paving contractors the authority to use this
ground? Who permits them to remain there?
What has Col. Casey to say about the matter?
If 1t Is United States property he Ia In charge
and is responsible for their continued occu-
pancy, whoever may have first permitted them
to go there. Let US know who shoulders the re.
sponsibillty.
The photographers of Rhode Island are sadly
behind the times In not having before the pub-