The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1893-06-16
FIXING RESPONSIBILITY
Experts at the Ford's Theater Dis
aster Inquest.
INCOMPETENT WORK THE CAUSE

ARCHITECT Clark and Inspector Entwistio
Agree with Practical Builders That
Proper Precautions Were omitted-Col-
onei Ainsworth's Appeal Denied.
WASHINGTON, June 16In the inquest
on the Ford,s theater disaster before Coro
ner Patterson yesterday Colonel Aims
worth sent long letter in which he re-
lated that the hue and cry raised against
him in a few newspapers and by some OF
the clerks threatened to affect his standing
as an army officer, and asking that he be
permitted to be represented by counsel and
to cross examine witnesses. He asserted,
further, that the original jury was pre1u-
diced against him, and urged that q new
jury be empannelled. Theroroner declined
to accede to Colonel Ainsworth's request.
James l.. Parsons, a contractor and
builder, was the first witness. To- asserted
that the work Of excavating could have
been done with absolute safety with proper
precautions
Mr.. Edward Clark the architect of the
capital, told Of the alterations to the thea
ter building which he made in 1865. The
building was then perfectly safe. In 1888
he made an examination Of the structure
and thought it safe. The east wall bulged
q little rand caused some apprehension
among the clerks, but he did not consider
that there was danger from this cause.
He would not have undertaken to do the
work without snoring.
At the suggestion of Juror Hanyey Mr..
Clark promised to inspect the theater
building before continuing his testimony.
Thomas b. Entwistle, inspector of build
ings of the district, said he was called
upon about five years ago to go over to
the building and give his opinion as to its
safety At that time it was occupied by
the Medical museum. The result of that
examination was that he found the floors
and walls perfectly safe. Since that time
he had made no examination of it.
would you have undertaken the work
without shoringf" asked the district at
torney. "No sir, and in my opinion that
was the cause OF the disaster" In his
opinion rs an expert, the witness said the
accident was caused by interference with
tho base Of one Of the piers without shor-
ing.
Francis Sasse, the engineer of the old
theater building, said he had held that of
fice since March 81, 1850 He made the
specification for the electric light plant
He was not an architect, but had gradu.
ated from technical school where archi
lecture was In the course of studies. The
theater building was not lighted well, md
1t was decided by Colonel Answorth to
put in an electric light plant, so he drew
up the plans and specifications last fal
and gave them to Colonel Ainsworth. HI
had drawn them up in order to save tim,
in explaining the character of the work tt
the contractor who might bid. Some o.
tho bids submitted were as low as 5000
but after careful inquiry it was decided
that Mr. Dant, who was awarded the con
tract tha lptypst rpsnpngihla hilhnr
His bid was something more than 5000
The witness looked at the excavation
every day, but saw no signs of snoring.
Witness said he told clerk after the ac
cident that if the work had progressed an
other hour the danger would have passed
This did not mean, however, that he fore
saw any danger; he merely believed tina
the work would be completed in that time
James II. Dony, the compositor who Sc
~ the original text Of the specification
z6s the electric lighting plant, was caIie
TO identify the handwriting in which tn
specifications were written. He said Ii
thought half of them were type write
and the rest In Colonel Ainsworth's hand
writing He could not find the origina
copy. 1t had probably been thrown int
the waste basket. 1t was not customary
hs said to destroy copy in the war depart
ment printing office.
G. w. Perkins, a builder, said nc ha
been In the theater building several time
since the accident, and it was his opinio
that the brick work. so nearly as he coul
judge, was good, but he would have shore
the piers. He was unable 10 explain ho'
any of the piers were undermined withou
bcing shored.
A bricklayer OF forty years experience
David p. Cissel who has erected man
h,,ildtnuo in, Waebipatan "a
that he had gone into the old theatre built
ing two days previous to the accident wit
a view to make an estimate on doing IL
brick work The excavation was going O
Rt the time He noticed man underpll
ming wall, but saw no evidence of sho
ing, although he did not look forit Sinc
the collapse he made an examination {
the building and concluded that the III
Bkilful manner in which the work W,
done caused the accident. The work, l
said, was "about tho worst he ever saw
Mr.. Cissel considered that there wou
have been no danger to the clerks if IL
work had been done properly.
Another builder who testified was G
lumbus Thomas, with thirty years exp
rience. He had been bidder for the wol
of putting In the electric light plant, h
bid being about 81 800, of which 5000 w
for snoring The work he thought cou
not have been safely done without shorin
Captain Martin r. Thorpe, chief of Il
supply division, was called next.
brought with him official papers relatil
TO the work In the old theater buildn
He had nothing to do with the preparati
of the specifications, which he understo
were supervised by Colonel Ainswor
salone The list of bids read by CAPITA
Thorpe showed that the lowest bidder W
" .xrt,p lad
contract at 1850 The highest bid w
1900. Four of the bids, including NJ
Dents, were between $3.50 and s.. Goo