The evening times., 1898-12-07
PASSING OF THE
Chimney sweeps
Ancient Office Abolished by
The Commissioners.
AN OBSOLETE STATUTE
No Such Regulation to Be Found
in Other Cities.
Opinion of Chief Paris - Letters
From Various Mayors-ThOse
AN OBSOLETE STATUTE
Opinion of Chief Paris - Letters
From Various Mayors-1hOse
Who Have Held the Office.

nanceS OF the Olu corpOrdtlollS Vi w "S't-
ington and Georgetown has been reie-
gated to the past.
The chimney sweep statutes, which
have been the source of much annoyance
to the local public during recent years
and the cause of many complaints TO the
District Commissioners since fall fires
were started, has been abolished by the
Commissioners.
The office of chimney sweep was also
swept from the list of District appoint
ments with the signing, shortly after
O'Clock last evening of recommendations
made by Commissioner Wight, favoring
its abolition.
Few cities other than Washington that
pretend to be possessed with the spirit OF
modern municipal Improvement and up
to-date ordinances and regulations have
official chimney sweeps. With the adop-
ton of regulations providing for the cree
tion of brick. stone and other flre-proot
structures within modern city limits and
with the perfection of the latrobe ana
kitchen range the need of chimney
sweeps has disappeared. In most other
Municipalities such laws We're eliminated
long ago. In the Capital City of the ma
ton, where. however, the laws are com
MEX. and, which still retains many of the
earlier enactments upon its statute DOCKS
the abolition of the office has been long
delayed. Al this day one Is disposed to
look with ridicule upon the absurdltles
OF the ancient statutes.
Among other now ludicrous PROVISIONS
are those sections Of the law which per-
mitted the official chimney sweeps 10
enter any house in the city for the pur-
pose of examining chimneys; that Iihe
might be imposed on the occupant OF the
house for refusal TO permit this; that
fine might be imposed upon the chimney
sweeps for failing TO do their work thor
oughIy and upon the sweep for every
chimney that caught fire after he had
scraped it's SCOT. All persons who refused
10 have their chimneys swept twice every
winter were also subject to penalty
sta.stics-Ioving person II the Dlslltt
building figured out the salary that Nouiu
accrue TO the official chimney sweeps, pro-
vided they complied with The old resu'H-
lion and swept every Washington chimney
twice a wear. Could they accomplish such
a task. their income, in fees, would De
more than s400, coo yearly.
The cleaning of chimneys has been at
tended bv more or less sitting OF SCOT
through crevices into the interior apart
ments of a residence. Many complaints
have been made 10 the Commissioners re-
Gently by persons who had never had
their chimneys swept and had not even
heard of the queer regulation requiring
them to do 50. They complained that the
sweeps had called at their residence and
demanded entrance to cleanse the CHM
neys.- Househoders asked for informa-
ton. They were told that under the old
regulation the Commissioners could not
prevent the chimney sweeps from de-
manding the privileges attached 10 their
vocation. The matter was Immediately
taken up by the Commissioners, resulting
In the abolition Of the office of chimney
sweep yesterday.
The recommendation OF Commissioner
Wight which was promptly signed and
approved by his associate. Capt. Beach,
the Engineer Commissioner, is as follows:
Having given this matter much atten-
ton, and having been influenced by the re-
plies from other cities, herewith attached,
as well as by the recommendation of the
chief engineer OF the fire department, l
recommend that the office of chimney
sweep be abolished This will not neces-
sariiy prevent chimneys from being swept.
as men. no doubt. will be engaged in that
business ana may be secured for such SER
vices when desired.
The recommendation OF Chief Paris, OF
the fire department. TO which reference Is
made by Commissioner Wight. is fol-
lows:
II would say. in view of the fact that
buildings are constructed so entirely dif-
ferent now to what they were when the
office was established. / can see no reason
why the office of superintendent of Chin
ney sweeps should be continued, and as
far as my department is concerned, there
is no absolute necessity for it,
The replies from the officials of other
cities, prompted by the query of the Dis
trict Commissioners, requesting copies
OF ordinances regulating the sweeping of
chimneys are interesting
John T Nagle. chief of the Bureau of
Municipal Statistics of New York, states
that that city has no such ordinance. but
that. as safeguard, it has a regulation
which imposes a fine of S. on the occu-
pant of any premises where the chimney
shall take fire.
Mayor Quincy of Boston replied that
there is no such ordinance in his city.
Such a regulation was in force for a
great many years up TO about 1885. but
was dropped out of the ordinances in the
revision made at that time
Joseph H. Paist chief of the select
! councils of that place have never enacted
( any laws governing people engaged in
such an occupation. Chimney sweeping
| ceased long ago in Philadelphia, and 1t
/ has been many years since the work has
: been done owing TO the use of anthracite
] coal.
Robert f. McKisson stated that there
! is no chimney sweep ordinance in the city
OF Cleveland. Ohio, of which he is mayor
/ Similar replies We're received to the
/ letters addressed to Charles A Collier
! and Hon. r. NJ. Taylor, who are mayors
! respectively, of Richmond and Atlanta
/ There are at the present time three Of
( fetal chimney sweeps. They were APP
/ pointed February 8, 1897, and are James
| Irvine, First district; James A. Nelson
! Second district, and Frank Bayden, Third
] district. Twine was originally appointed
| from Georgetown October 8. 1888. and be-
! came superintendent of chimney sweeps
| January q, 1895. Later he was assigned
| TO the First district.
| Nelson was originally appointed August
! . 1881 and first saw service as chief of
chimney sweeping in the First, Second,
Third and Fourth wards.
The other chimney sweeps since the for
nation of the present District govern
ment, in 1873 were: Charles Lemon
| Georgetown, appointed December ], 1873
| dead John Banks, deceased, Washington
appointed December l. 1873; A. Mcintosh
| Washington, First. Second and Third
! wards, appointed June l. 1878, and removed
August l, 1881; James Mandexter, Wash.
ington Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventl
wards, appointed November "A, 1882, an6
removed June 30 1891; Robert Smock
Georgetown, appointed August 81, 1887, ant