The age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1897-1902, 1897-10-30
MR.. BELLCNYDER
WAS ARRAIGNED
In Ugly Charge Has Preferred by Col.
H.. 4. benson.
TRIAL OF PLUMBER CASES
Provoked The Allegations in Regard to
Replacement Of Paving. :.
POCKETED SOME OF THE MONEY
Said Denson-Collected One Dollar Per Square
Yard For Work and Had Il Done Cheaper
The Decision Has Not Yet
Been Rendered.
POCKETED SOME OF THE MONEY

The case of the plumbers VS.. the city,
which has attracted much attention for
the past two days, is still unsettled.
The argument of both sides was heard
yesterday before Judge Feagin of the
police court. The judge took the case
under advisement and will probably
not render a decision for several days.
If the case is decided against the plum
bers they will appeal to the higher
court
Speaking of the case, Col. w. A. D n
son. of the law firm Of benson & Tan
ner, said:
1.-THE city passed an ordinance regu-
lating the plumbing business and before
any plumber cold begin BUSINESS he
had to secure license for one year,
which cost him $500 He had to exc
cute a bond for $1,000 to hold the city
harmless in exeavating any part of the
htrset and pavement.
THE city also passed an ordinance
requiring plumber to get a permit
from the city engineer to do any exca-
walton or work on the sidewalks, for
which he had to pay 81. In addition to
the bond of 81, 900 ths plumber was re-
quired to deposit $40 cash with the city
treasurer to pay the city for replacing
the pavement of any street in which an
excavation had been made. While the
city makes them give bond for 81 900
to replace the pavement, it prohibits the
plumber from replacing the pavement
himself.
1.-THE city assumes the right to re-
place 1t and charge the plumber with
she cost
Mr. LaRosse. plumber. who had
paid $25 for his license fee, and executed
his 81 900 bond to hold the city harmless
from any injury that might occur from
his work and to replace all pavements
removed by himself, rendered 81 as a
permit fee to excavate in Twenty-first
street.
1.-THE city engineer refused to grant
the permit although the 81 was offered,
unless he would make a deposit of $40.
Mr. LaRosse declined to put up the
$40, but proceeded to make the exca-
walton, and he was arrested for viola
ton of the ordinance BY agreement
LaRosse paid in $40 to the police court
to be applied to the replacement by the
CITY, The ordinance requires that if the
cost of the replacement was less than
$40 the remainder should be paid back
to LaRosse, but If it cost more than
so LaRosge must pay the difference
''On the trial of the case the evidence
show d. that by an agreement the street
authorities and chief engineer held that
The plumbers were to pay 81 per square
yard, for replacing the brick. The proof
also proved that LaRosse filed up the
excavation and put it in condition for
the mere laying of the brick.
1.-THE proof also shows that Mr.. Bell
snyder was the person who had been en-
plOyeu Tor at least Two years TO nave the
brick replaced. He had the brick re-
PLACID in this case. The amount was
estimated to be thirtsen square yards
for which the city made a charge agalngt
LaRosse for s13. The undisputed proof
of five experienced witnesses established
the fact that the extreme cost to re-
place the brick would be S.
Mr.. Danson charged in open court that
there WAS no evidence that Bellsnyder
had it replaced by skilled labor or that
he was skilled in laying the brick, but
the undisputed evidence showed that he
had the brick replaced by unskilled labor
and according to the evidence s1S went
into the pocket of Bellsnyder, when
according to the witnesses S. would have
been ample remuneration.
9TH evidence also showed, - continued