Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1888-12-22

IL matter of indifference whether the con-
tractor pays them or not. They can simply
lien the building and the owner has to pay.
Such lien has prior claim from the date Of
beginning the building and for three months
after Its completion. In my opinion there il
no law that can work greater hardship to the
class II was supposed to benefit than this law.
Inc object was to secure the wages Of the me-
chanic. The old law did not do this. The pres
ent law affords too much protection.
financial standing, to get contract for erect
ing building. Under these circumstances
builder with little capital is placed at disad-
vantage. Architects can't advise their clients
to accept such bids. Bonds afford but small
relief, as they only invite lawsuit. So you
see under the present Law you have to be ex-
tremely careful whom YOU employ and il is
necessary to keep a close supervision over the
bills and receipts. II seems to me that a law
might be framed that would protect all inter-
ests and give advantage to none"
Mr.. JOSEPH C. HoRNBLowER,
Of the firm Of Hornblower 4 Marshall. was
opening his letters when the reporter asked
him for his views upon the present law, but he
did not let that occupation deter him from
very decided expression of opinion. He said:
Il think that the law is defective and should
be repealed, or else so amended that il oper-
ates more justly than it does at present The
worst feature is the clause which permits liens
to be filed ninety days after the completion Of
building. 1t puts the owner in position to
be surprised with the presentation of a bill
long after he has settled with the con-
tractor. He has to pay, and then his
only recourse is to the burdensome and I'M
certain process of a lawsuit. 1t seems to me
that the law was framed for the express benefit
OF some dishonest material men. for this class
receives the greatest possible protection from
the law. 1 cannot see why any honest mer-
chant should want to take advantage of the
lien privilege. for if he is honest he will be
careful to look after the honesty of his custom
ers. If he does that there is no necessity to re-
sort to lien. for an honest contractor will pay
his bills. do not think that an owner can
make himself safe by any means under this
law. for it is impossible for any contractor to
give guarantee that no liens will be filed
against the building, since there is no means of
his knowing whether his sub-contractors have
settled up all their obligations or not.
The law operates to encourage dishonesty
and to discourage building. l believe that the
existence OF the present lien law has caused a
decrease in building operations in this city.
People coming here with an idea of building.
after discovering the existence Of such a law.
are very likely to change their minds. l do
not see that there Is any chance for amend
ments to the law being secured unless the
property-owners of the whole city make a
decided and organized movement The trouble
lies in the fact that the Commissioners are in
favor of the present law and have SO declared
to Congress for some reason or other. cannot
imagine why they should favor the continue
of such an unjust measure"
W. BRUCE GRAY's OPINION.
w. Bruce Gray said that the law did not af-
feet his business at all, as he employed only
responsible men. There had never been a lien
placed upon building that he had charge of as
he always exercised great care in the selection
In act hn Mt rlh taA
munity from all trouble in this regard to the
character of men employed. During the past
year" he went on. Il built large building
where no general contract was made. All the
different parts of the work was contracted for
separately and l had no less than sixteen
contractors. Even with this large number. all
were responsible men, able to give satisfac-
tory bond, which guaranteed the own
er from all loss. One effect of the
law has been to make those building
careful in their choice of contractors. and 1
think that in this respect the law has proved to
be beneficial. 1t has also prevented the worst
features of speculative building. 1t is practi-
cally impossible for irresponsible men TO I'M
dertake the erection Of rows of houses as I'M
der the old law. People won't loan money I'M
der the present law On prospective buildings.
The lien for debts incurred during the cree
ton OF a building is a first mortgage on prop
erty. l think 1t is good thing for the city
that the erection of ''slop houses" as they may
be termed. has been checked if not prevented
altogether. The persons who suffer from this
law are those who persist in employing ire
sponsible men simply because they think they
are cheap. The fact is such men are not
cheap, Independent of the fact that they may
not pay their debts
Another result of the law" he added. ..has
been to bring into the market number of
irresponsible men who enter into competition
for contracts to erect houses It il seldom L
bulId n hOnSa that the Anea
the names of several men whom he wishes to
put III Dlds. In cases where a man unknown
to me proves to be the lowest bidder l satisfy
myself that his bond contains the names of
sureties who are perfectly safe. If this condi-
ton is not complied with l refuse to give the
man the contract. 1 uniformly decline to un-
dertake the responsibility of experimenting
building when L am not sure about the
contractors. With these precautions building
can be carried on in this city with satisfaction
to all concerned. 1t may be deemed wise to
modify the present law. but if the changes pro-
posed viii have the effect of making people
careless about the kind of workmen they en-
plOy am of the opinion that the law had better
remain Is. We are certainly better off under
the present law than under the old law, and
would regret a return to the old system which
made it possible for men to dist cure the CITY
with the unsightly structures which they called
homes. badly-built house simply means
that few dollars have been saved for a time
1t is an endless bill of expense and in a short
time it has actually cost more than would have
been required to build it properly in the first
place"
WHAT JAMES G. HILL SAYS.
''Under the present law" remarked Mr..
James G.. Hill, ''the owner has absolutely no
protection. There are no means that can be
devised to secure him. OF course he may re-
quire bond, but that involves a law suit.
The real trouble lies in this. that every man
who has done any work on the building. how
ever slight, or who has furnished any material.
can lien the building. The contractor may
pay all his bills and will be able to furnish
receipts. Every one who has worked on the
building, perhaps. has been paid. but some
men working in a shop on material used in the
building have, perhaps not been paid. They
have the right to put lien on the property. /.
is manifestly impossible for a man to
follow up every stick Of timber that
goes into his house and ascertain
if it has been paid for. But that is exactly
what the present law requires before an
owner can be entirely secure. I believe in a
lien law. but it seems to me that the present
law is unjust
Il can see no objection to requiring any man
who has a claim to give notice to the owner 30
that he may be able to provide for it, But to
wait until all the bills have been paid, and then
to come down on the unfortunate owner, is a