The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1899-08-18
lie Thought He Had a Permit To
Erect 1t But lie Didn't.
Aldermen Once Ordered
1t Taken Down.
But Yesterday Granted Hear
ing On Reconsideration.

Ihe trouble was caused By Mr.. s. H.
Colesworthy, Jr., getting permit &c
bupd part Of dwelling house and think.
ing he had the necessary permission te
put up an ell TO IL as well proceeded to dc
so. When the all was completed he found
that permission had only been granted
him TO erect "a house and not the ell. The
alderman. on a protest being made
against this building rs nuisance by
Col, John ID. Prindapls and some others,
ordered this ell removed at the meeting
on August 18th. Mr.. Colesworthy had nc
idea that action would be taken SO soon
by the aldermen and petitioned the alder
men Ter hearing and reconsideration
of this order of removal. The hearing
was granted yesterday afternoon and &C.
cupied about an hour and,a half of the al
dermen's time. 1t was finally adjourned
about six O'Clock TO this afternoon at four
O'Clock when it Will be continued.
The protest against the addition to Mr.
Colesworthy's houss was on the ground
that the ell adds TO ths danger of nro to
houses in the vicinity, that the ell itself Ia
unsafe and that 1t damages tins neighbor-
ing property. Thesprotest was signed by
the heirs OF Mary Prsble, by Marion d.
Noyes through her attorney Edward ID.
Noyes, james P. Baxter, Fred a. Drink.
water, q. p. Waliron, Margaret Prind-
able, S. Bourne, Henry Dsering and sis
tiers and w III. Pearson.
MIR, Colesworthy in. his petition for a
hearing aud reconsideration OF the alder
mems order to tear down the ell gave sew
eral reasons for his petition. First he ia
u tax payer and .oisizen of Portland
second, that the ell is proper part of the
dwelling and Is not a nuisance; thirdly,
that when the ell was erected Mr.. Coles
worthy believed he had the permission
necessary to build It; fourthly, 1t was
not n public nuisance and If 1t were be
could ses no reason why hearing should
not be given him to present his side OF
the case and titthly that ne had desired &C
appear before the committee on buildings
when his matter was taken up for consid-
Grafton but had been told by one Of the
aldermen that action on his petition to
build the ell would not be taken at the
TINS IL was ordered IN owed and therefore
he believed it to be his legal right to be
granted hearing.
MIR. Coleswor5hy was represented by
Jud Peabody as his attorney, while
County AttorneyGeorge Libby appeared
for Col. John ID. Printable and the re-
Judge Peabody in making his opening
argument said that at the outset the mat
ter WINS very simple one but 1t had been
by series OF misunderstand-
ings and was now In very jumbled up
condition. The hon Sc in question is on
the easterly side Of Grove street. Mr..
Colssworthy had began to dig the founda-
tons for this house the last of April or
the first of May. Before he had COM
work on the dwelling the inspect
or of buildings, MIR. Jordan, came along
one day and asked Mr.. Colesworthy If he
had obtained permit to build on this
lot MIR. Colesworthy said that he had
not and the inspector of buildings then
told him that he was going down to city
hall and would secure u building permit
for him. Mr.. Colesworthy thereupon gave
to the inspector of buildings the dimen-
sions and style of the proposed house
which Mr. Jordan took note of and went
to city hall to get the necessary permits.
sion. Mr.. Colesworthy had later seen
in the paper the fact that his permission
han haan cd hx,k ha
men. He thought that It included the ell
as well as the main house. On August
9th the inspector Of buildings notified Mir.
Colesworthy that his permit had not In
Guided the ell and that Alderman Smith
was very angry to think that he had
erected the ell when he did not have per.
to do so. That was the fret Mr..
Colesworthy knew about the permit not
covering the ell as well as thu main
house. He at once put in an application
for permit to build the ell which was
already built but instead the aldermen
voted to order him to tear it down.
Judge Peabody went to say that Mr..
Colesworthy was present the night his
peEltion for a permit came up in the
board of aldermen but was told that 1t
would not be considered that evening.
After ne went home the order to tear
down the ell was passed. He believed
that he Was entitled TO hearing on the
matter and for that purpose was present
this afternoon.
Judge Peabody went on to say that in
his mind the ordinance Prohibiting the
erection Of certain kinds Of buildings
within the SO called lire limits was per,