Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-02-05
WHO DID THE WORK?
A PLUMBER CHARGED WITH Or
TANNING LICENSE IMPROPERLY.
THE EVIDENCE is VERY CONFLICTING.
Committee on Water Conducts In
vcstigation That Arouses Much In
terest-Mr. AtIsisson Must Demon
s'gate His Ability.

There was a speci1l meeting of the
Water Committee held last night IN the
City Hall TO consider a charge against
Mr.. w. Atkisson OF resorting TO a sub
terfuge to secure plumbers license.
The investigation was chiefly remark
able for the conflicting evidence. Mr..
George Cottrell stated that he had done
certain work on Randolph street at Mr..
Atkisson's request. The accused upon
whom the work had been imposed when
he first came to the city, as a means OF
demonstrating his ability as a plumber,
swore that he had done the work with
his own hands. The committee decided
that he should be given a similar piece
of work TO do under supervision, and II
he performed it satisfactorily, he should
| be duly licensed. Mr.. II. NJ. Smith, Jr.,
appeared as counsel for Mr.. Atkinson
The following members of the commit
tee were present: Messrs. Briggs CHAIR
man. Montgomery. Carter. o. A Haw-
1 kins. zimmerman, and CARRIER. Mr..
| Boiling stated to the committee that Mr..
| Atkisson. then a perfect stranger to him,
i applied for a plumbers license He told
| Atkisson that he would grant the license
J II he would bring him reliable references
/ as TO his ability as plumber, and the
reply had been that he had learned his
| trade I'm Washington and knew no one
in Richmond to whom he could refer.
Mr.. Boiling said he then told him that
If he would do some plumbing work,
which showed that he was a competent
plumber, he would grant the license.
Some time after, said Mr.. Boiling MT.
Atkinson returned and stated that he
had done some work at No. Coz Randolph
street This work was inspected and
found satisfactory. and license was Is
sued to him for 1896, which was renewed
the following year.
After it's second renewal, continued
Mr.. Boiling, he began to hear rumors
| that Mr.. Atkinson had not done the
| work on Randolph street at all, but that
II had been done by Mr.. George Cottrell.
He began TO investigate the matter ana
had some work that Mr.. Atkinson had
| done I'm 1897 inspected by City-Plumber
| Hin. This was found to have been per-
| formed In a manner which violated the
| city ordinances.
Mr. Boiling stated further that ne had
sought out Mr.. Cottrell, and that gen.
tleman had stated to him that ne lCot-
trelD had done the work on Randoiph
| street.
| TWO CONFLICTING STATEMENTS
Mr.. Boiling presented two statements
sworn to before notaries public one from
| Mr. Cottrell and the other from Mr.. At
kinson. both declaring that they nad
done the work on Randolph street.
In view OF these facts, Mr.. Boiling
| said he had deemed 1t proper TO with
| hold a license from Mr.. Atkinson until
he had cleared himslef Of the suspicion
that he might have obtained license IN
| 1896 Improperly.
| Mr.. II. NJ. Smith. Jr., appeared for MT.
| Atkinson by permission OF the commit
| tee and vigorously cross-eXamined the
witnesses who testified.
| Mr. Hill testified to having Inspected
| the work done on Randolph street, anc
| 10 have found it done in a proper manner
| He told how he first heard that MT. Az
| kisson had not done the work. IL had
| been said around the ONCE ne s'dteu'
| that Mr.. Atkisson was not plumber,
| and that a shoemaker could now get
a numbers license in Richmond"
Mr. Cottrell testified at length. and with
| attention TO detail. that he had done the
| work on Randolph street, at the request
| of Mr. Atkisson He was sharply cross
| examined.
ATKISSON ON THE STAND.
| Mr. Atkisson Testified that he lsarned
his trade i'm Washington. where he work
| ed for nine wears. and that he thought he
| could do any kind of work that any other
| Number could do. He was willing 10
| swear positively that Mr. Cottrell had
never done any kind of work for him.
| He further declared that he had done
all of the Randolph-street work, with
his own hands.
He further stated that he had been do
ing all the plumbing work for {. Ii. q
II. L. Denoon for some time past, ana
had bought house from these gentle
men.
saemed 70 further tangle the already
greatly involved affair, and Mr.. Carter
| said the question was one which il would
,,nzzle solomon himself to decide. Ho
! therefore moved. as a solution of the
ubola thing. that Mr.. Atkisson should be
| reouired TO duplicate the work done at
COZ Randolph street. II he was able to
| do this. he would cheerfully vote to give
| him license.
Mr.. Smith protested against the adop-
tion of such a motion The question. he
said. was not one of getting license
| II was to remove stain from tho name
| of Mr. Atkisson. and to show that he had
not ATTEMPTED 10 deceive Mr.. Boiling and
| TO defraud the city
THE POINT AT ISSUE.
Mr.. Boiling said the question was not
whether he was a practical plumber, for
he had done some work in the presence
of Inspector-of-P Plumbing Hill. which
though rough, entitled him TO license
! The question was whether he could be
| trusted with a plumbers license. II he
| had in the first instance violated city
1 ordinance by obtaining permit TO do
certain work, and then let 1t out to some
| one else.
| Nr zimmerman thought the conside-
ration OF the matter should be postponed
90 eome future day, in order that neces-
| sarv witnesses could be summoned. MT
! carter. however, thought the introdC--
tion of new witnesses would only serve
IN further complicate matters.
Mr.. Carters motion was put and car
ried without dissent.
The committee, on request OF the Super
intendent. then approved his action In
| iesulng a special permit TO do repair
york pending action on his application
| tor a license. The committee then ad-
| journed. "
FIRE PERMITS RECOMMENDED.
A. a meeting of the Council Commit
zoo on Fire Department held in the City
uau a number OF building permits were
recommended to the Council, and the
regular meeting night OF the committee
nc changed TO the Friday before the
s., Nsopdav I'm each month. The men,