New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-04-23


acting in judicial capacity, II he was interested
In nth the other side and Is paid a retainer? A-The
terest. The Building Department has only one OBJ
,eet IN yiew-to help along the building interest and
Q-And yet you say there are cases where you
, , one case and approve another the same sys
some buildings n certain freproonng would be per-
fecty proper and would be wrong In another build
o:-You would grqnt that it Is possible. II man
Is not disposed to be honest. that there would be
ne fullest opportunity under this sytem? A-No.
power Of these societies They are not sent there
for fe they sS are for or, speSed Sa ro,oror "a
taken? A.-No. sir. they don't tell us that they
have been paid.
BETTER THAN $4,000 A YEAR.
OFF this system is going on. and If the Board
OF Examiners Is taking money 10 pass upon plans
afterward coming before them, how Is this society
going to act upon that? l asking your opinion
as an expert upon a system which seems to me to
be open to grave censure? A.-The only feasible
plan OF getting good Board Is the plan of the
present Board.
Q.-Is that true? Our judges, we pay them
salary OF 1880 year, and they expect that they
will not engage in private practice during the time
they hold office. II you pay the Board OF Exami1;
not that be system that would remove them from
salary
Q.IDo you mean the city is too poor? A.-They
Q.-Who would not do It? A.-The members of the
Board Of Examination. those members OF the Board
o.-Is there any member Of the Board Of Examin-
who Is engineer? A.-George g. Post Is an
architect and engineer.
Q.-Any other members? A-No.
peient engineers who would give up their business
FOR salary Of $3.50? A.-Yes, sir; but they would
not pay that.
Oh am sure that the city and the State would
pay a large enough salary to men In order 10 have
a salary commensurate with their services, because
the Board of Examiners only have short meetings.
Board OF Examiners just important that Of a
judge-a man that is passing every week, passing
lives OF the people of New-York are directly at
stake? Alphabetically yes; practically no
really Of no benefit? Al mean to say that there
is no fear of any serious mistake being made by
the Department OF Buildings In regard TO the
safety of property.
OBSCURE METHODS OF THE BOARD
Ono question is likely 70 reach the Board OF
Examiners and get by the Building Department?
Ayes sir
Q.-what is the necessity for having this high
class talent, which you say the city could not af-
ford to pay for? A.-They could not afford to pay
for 1t If they demanded these people to give up
their business and devote themselves simply to de-
partment work.
Q.-What is the necessity for such high class
OF work If the work is not practically OF any great
he building law ", has to have
architects and owners, there should be board OF
5ReFe and Of 1g2y large g
There is always Board OF Appeals provided for.
building Department.. An kinds Of cases.
Q.-Why Is II that these questions referred to
you-is 1t because the questions intricate and
involved? A.Some are and some are very simple
volye an elaborate explanation or discussion of
An owner has the right to appear before this Board
Q.-ls 1t the custom when matter comes before
Tha is er rg hta "p
Q-lsn't 1t generally so? A-No. 1t Is not In the
OIL have not got this very clearly in my mind
! understood you TO say that last week you had
which is less than three minutes for each case
may be trine obtuse, but ! cannot see how any
receive much consideration at the hands
of the Board when the Board disposes of seventy
seven cases in three hours A-There might have
related to the fireproof hoor the aTst-sory fire.
proof floor; one may have been asking for the use
OF one thing and another. and so on. and that only
takes part of minute and we disposed of case
Q.-You think the law ought to be modified in
that respect? Ayes; think the law ought to be
modified so as to let in all these cases They should
be let In under proper restrictions.
SUGGESTIONS FOR BETTER LAW.
Q.-You think that these tests ought all to be de-
| fined in the law? Al think the law ought to pro-
vide that these tests shall be made to show their
ability and strength Some are made out OF ma
terals that deceitfu; we don't even know
o-Is It Your Judgment that the law ought to be
as clear and distinct possible. and leave little
discretion to the Building Department as possible?
Or the reverse? A.-No. sir; the first propo-
brought by MI RspP that it was decided by Judge
Smyth that 1t the duty of the Superintendent
That fI wasn't in NJ the he RaPp case, sir
Q..What case was 1t in? THAT Vas Vas In the
Q.-Within few months past? A.-No, sir. The
one I refer to before Mr. Constable went out
o. am speaking Of recent case just prior to
the taking on OF the rs Pendens ehai naI put
on MF Sra happ' building by the superintendent
Q.IAre you still of the opinion that the passing
iners rather than the Superintendent Of Buildings?
ent time Judge smyth decided in that syndicate
Building as | remember that the Superintendent
mo-" o.@Exactiy. Now we have it; If that was the
case the principle Is the same as the one have In
tendent Of Buildings to first determine whether he
function Of your Board is on appeal from his de-
Q.-Why do you say these matters belong nitlally
TO the Board OF Examiners? A.-Because, sir, when
buildings II that application is in accordance with
the law. the Superintendent passes tor rather
the Commssioner-the Commissioner passes Ii if II
in accordance with the requirements OF the la H
Il Is not he denies IT, That Is what ne must Zoo ao
or better. and he denies It,
REAL REASON HARD TO PROVE.
Q.-But you say. Mr.. Fryer. that each OF these
Rapp cases that come before you are small formal
matters that are disposed OF in a fraction OF
minute? Ayes sir.
O-Are not those matters denied as matter OF
course by the Department of Buildings and turned
right over to you? Ayes sir.
Q.-Why is that? A.-Because the Rapp system
or any other system Is not in accordance with the
law 1t requires the affirmation OF the Board OF
Appraisers. ,, 49,,
case where II is asked to be put In on the first
floor which you have agreed Is perfectly right, why
is Il the concern of the Building Department TO
only put It in on the first floor in every case and
refused them to your Board? A-Whether the
FIRST floor or tenth floor the Rapp system is not In
accordance with the requirements OF the law Az
tenement houses must have the first floor hreproof
and il has been the practice 10 accept almost any
of these constructions for the first floor without
question and therefore II you have plenty Of these
cases among the seventy-fve. one asking for Kapp
and one for Bailey, etc.
o-Not only must all tenement houses be fire.
proof on the first floor. but hotels? A-Hoteis
must be hreproof entirely. a. 49,,