The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-05-06
A PERSISTENT PLUMBER
PETITION FOR n WRIT or MANDA-
MUS BEFORE JUDGE WITT.
pioy n Plumber Whose License Had
Been Revoked for Disobevtng tho Law.

An important question was argued In
the hastings court before Judge Witt yes
terday. which grew out Of a petition for
writ Of mandamus presented 10y II. Holz-
hauer, who asked that Mr.. Charles Il.
Boiling, superintendent OF the city water
works. be compelled to issue him
plumbers license. Messrs II. NJ. Smith,
Jr., and Louis Wendenburg represented
the petitioner. while city Attorney {. v.
Meredith looked after the interests Of
Superintendent Boiling.
The petition sets forth that few weeks
ago MIR. Holzhauer applied 10 Mr.. BOILING
for plumbers license; that he had been
in the timing business for a number or
years and that he would employ Thomas
NJ Landers. a skllful and practical
plumber and other plumbers whose
names he would submit, as soon as MS
business would Justify It. Mr.. Boiling,
in a letter dated April II. 1898, refused 10
grant the license to petitioner, saying that
Landers on former occasions had violated
his plumbers license by using other pipe
than provided by law, ana by laying the
pipe without digging to the required depth.
The petition claims that the superinten-
dent had no right TO refuse the license 10
the petitioner.
city Attorney Meredith on behalf OF
Superintendent Boiling presented general
demurrer to the petition. In arguing
the case Mr.. Meredith stated that the
question presented at least moral If not
a legal right as TO whether the ordinance
was broad enough 10 prevent a man from
deliberately violating the law by putting
i'm cheaper and cheating work. on
former occasion Mr.. Landers had used
galvanized iron instead Of lead pipe, and
he failed to lay the pipe two feet deep
as prescribed by law. His action was not
discovered until four years later, and
when the case was called in the police
court II had 10 be dismissed according
TO the statute Of Limitation. Mr.. Boiling
subsequently revoked his license. and
declined 10 renew the same when ne
learned that Mr.. Landers did not feel dls-
posed TO desist from using cast iron pipe.
Mr. Meredith argued that the term
practical plumber" involved that the
man should not only have thorough
knowledge Of his profession, but put the
same i'm practice In compliance with the
existing laws and regulations. He claimed
that under the statute a mandamus could
not be granted for the petitioner had an
nounced his intention 20 employ a man
who had openly and deliberately violated
the law, and declined 10 obligate himself
10 hereafter carry out the law. He did
not think that license should be granted
when u was shown that the applicant
had not only violated the letter Of the
law. but also the spirit Of the same.
The section Of the city ordinances re-
ferred TO by Mr.. Meredith reads as fol-
lows:
"All lead pipe used in connection with
water works shall be Of the following
weight per foot. 3-S inch diameter l
pound g ounces per foot; u inch diameter
pounds per foot; SIS inch diameter
pounds 8 ounces per foot. "a inch diameter,
pounds per foot; 1 inch diameter, pounds
per foot.
mo plumber will be allowed to put I'm
any lead pipe except I'm conformity with
this schedule OF weights; nor shall any
other be used except by special permits
sion Of the superintendent Of the water
works or committee. Penalty for each
violation. not less than ten nor more than
fifty dollars for each offense.
Each plumber. previous to undertaking
any Of the above work. shall receive
general license, without charge. from the
superintendent Of the water works. No
license will be granted % other than
practical plumbers, or 10 those who en-
ploy practical plumbers 10 do their work.
and satisfactory evidence Of their being
practical plumbers will be required before
the superintendent shall issue said license.
No licensed plumber will be permitted 20
take out a permit for work 10 be done by
person not I'm the employ Of such
plumber All licenses now I'm force shall
expire on the thirty-frst day OF December
next ensuing. and all licenses issued here
after shall be for the term ending Deem
Der thirty-frst next following their issue.
Violation OF rules. regulations, or condi-
lions as above laid down, will subject the
plumber TO q fine OF twenty dollars. or
continued disregard OF aforesaid condi-
lions. to a fine Of twenty dollars and for
fixture Of his license"
Mr. Louis Wendenhurg I'm his argument
claimed that Mr.. Holzhauer intended 10
go into the plumbing business. and the
superintendent OF the water works had
no right 10 withhold his license. 1t was
the duty OF the superintendent TO have
all the work inspected. and If this had
been done in Mr. Landers' case. the fault
had been discovered I'm time He took the
ground that Mr. Landers was a practical
plumber. and that this had been admit
ted by the other side In the demurrer.
Mr. II. VI. Smith Jr.. argued I'm a SINH
lar way. and Judge Witt finally took the
paper. stating that he would render his
decision as soon as possible.