Waterbury Democrat., 1901-02-13
BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
Lay Communication From Bricklayers on the Table.

May Communication From Bricklayers il on the Table.
 Hf The board of public works met last tight and heard parties interested in { Assessments for sewer purposes in q EDrayer avenue, 7Dikeman and Dublin Ia streets. \ hearing was also called for IS parties interested in the construction |S of sewer in Pearl street 16S feet snortherly from Hopkins street It was |#yoted to recommend to the aldermen that the sewer as petitioned for be or |E1ereG laid in Pearl street. No action ke was taken in reference to the matter Y of levying assessments for sewers in the other streets mentioned. It was voted to cite in property owners 1n Dikeman street, from the present ter 1 minus of the sewer 1E that street to Willard street on February 26, to be Heard regarding the construction Of sewer in front of their property Hear ngs relative to sewer assessments In Sylvan avenue, West Grove, Hill. |S South. Rye. Division and North Vine streets will be had on the same date.
 The bill of C. J. Pierpont for ten
 years car fare was taken from the
 fable and a vote passed recommending
 hat it be paid and that henceforth all | pill amounted to S.3.10.
 E It was voted to recommend to the
 aldermen that licenses to maintain
 1oot black stands on the public streets
 oe granted to John Deferari. corner Of
 West Main street and Exchange place; [ Pasquale Bros, 60 East Main street; z Nicholas Spadola, D East Main street. E It was voted to notify the property snolders on both sides of North Main tstreet, from Grove street to the south arly side of KingSbury street to make necessary sewer. water and gas con nections before May l. 1901. the time when the paving of that street will be- gin.
 A communication was received from the Bricklayers. MasonS and Plaster
 CTS International union. No 16. re-
 luesting the board to appoint a Dracti-
 cal bricklayer to inspect all sewer
 work. Alderman Mahaney thought Very Sfayorably of the petition and thought
 none but practical men should be ar
 pointed to such positions. Engineer
 Cairns did not think it necessary that an inspector should be a practical
 brickIayer, and stated that nine-tenths |fof the sewers laid in Waterbury are k tile pipes and wanted to know what tA bricklaYer knew about doing that class of work.
 $s Commissioner Mahaney contended
 that the inspector should be a practi- scal workman and asked the engineer If that was not the reason why no one
 could be appointed plumbing inspector
 but a practical plumber. Do you
 mean to tell me- asked the conmiS-
 Sioner. casting alternate glances at his srolleagues. and throwing an eye over
 his shoulder now and then at MT Cairns that a man who knows noth-
 ing about plumbing could fill that or
 flee? l guess not. The same thing is true of bricklaying. and no one is ft to inspect such work only q man who
 can do it himself.'' Commissioner Scully asked if an ar .rhitect who designs q structure was not competent to pass upon the char ncter of the work being performed on it. and if it was not q common thing to
 hear of Q clash between q contractor and an architect over such matters Mr 'Mahaney said that this was true. but 1 held that the inspector was quite diff i ferent to the architect. Engineer 1 iCairns remarked that the appointment ,'of a practical bricklayer 10 inspect sewer work would double the cost of construction without any appreciable , iDeneIiI to Jllc CltN- " t llttN tue ptSt sewer system in New England,' con | ttinued the engineer, 'and the work of Inspection was done by young men iwho received from S2 to S2.oO q day. tYou cant get a practical bricklayer for less than $50 or S4. If We had a large amount of brick work to do. it emight be all well enough to do this, lbut when the sewer work we have is ,lothing but laying tile pipes. l see no need of having the work inspected by q bricklayer.'
 Commissioner Scully asked who had -the power to appoint inspectors. the engineer or the board. Mir Cairns said Ihe believed the engineer could appoint them, subject to the approval of the board or the mayor. Commissioner !Blakeslee was not favorable to the l of an inspector by the | board. He thought it would hamper the bureau of engineering in many 1 ways.
 After long chat. the matter was l finally tabled. on motion of Mir Whit i ing.
 The board adjourned for one week. i