St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-05-12

this be given too narrow or technical q con-
strncuon, but should be considered In con-
nection with the nature of the business ana
duties required of the officer, which relate
not so much TO the style of architecture, ex-
ternal finish. or matters of ornamentation, as
a knowledge OF the principles OF architect
IRE as practically applied il deter
mining the strength, quality and adapta-
ton of materials and the proper
foundation for structures and also
in estimating aud calculating the proportion
ate strength of walls. timbers, columns and
supports. and the strain or pressure to W hich
they may be subjected in conformity with
the rules of the department. But the rel
sponsiblity andduties beingsuch as clearly res
quire this, the officer should be an expert
and the Legislature evidently intended that
he should be. such. Within the designated
class the discretion OF the council in the
election of such officer cannot be reviewed
And under any circumstances the case ought
TO be very clear 10 authorize quo waTr9nto
proceeding of this kind. The presumption
is i'll favor OF the validity and regularity OF
the appointment, but this is not conclusive,
and whether. wisely or not, the legislative
requirement appears TO be mandatory.
There must be some line of distinction be-
tween those who are entitled to be denomi-
mated architects" and those who are not
and the latter are not eligible. And II the
person elected is claimed to be ineligible the
fact may be made subject Of judicial inquiry.
The term architect" has well-dehned
meaning. Whether Il person Is or is not a
practical architect and sanitary engineer"
is matter susceptible OF proof and this
case must be determined upon the evidence
as disclosed BY the records. We have Very
carefully examined and considered alb the
evidence 1t is unnecessary To refer TO IT
i'll detail. Fairly construed, it admits OF
but one inference or conclusion (;
substantially there is no dispute upon the
merits of the case While the respondent
has had some experience i'll building for him
self and others. aud also in the construction
of sewers, he admits that he has never prac-
ticed or followed the profession of an arcnt
teCt and ii is quite clear that he is not suf-
ficiently skilled III the principles of architec-
ture and sanitary plumbing, or i'll the appli-
cation of the same in practice. to render him
eligible to the office of building inspector
under the ordinance. The city council has,
therefore, failed TO make valid appoint
ment. and the relator Is entitled to hold over
until such appointment or election is made.
There must be judgment of custer against
the respondent.
, The syllabus follows:
The ordinance of the city of St Paul pro-
viding for the appointment of building in
spectors and prescribing his qualifications is
valid.
The official term of the incumbent who
was elected in January, $780, was for The
term of two years, and until his successor
should be elected and qualified. -
Under the provisions of that ordinance a
person who is not practical architect and
sanitary engineer. as required thereby. is not
eligible to the Office; and such requirement
is mandatory.