Evening journal., 1905-09-22
BUILDING ROW
IS STILL ON
Inspector Connolly Asks City
to Take Action on the
Matter
CONFERENCE ON WEDNESDAY NIGHT

That Building Inspector Connolly
still believes he is right in the con-
troversy over the wall at No. 1923
Market street despite the fact that
the Chancellor has decided against
him, is evident from the tone of the
letter he sent to city Council last
night. The decree of the court upheld
the building committee in it's action
in overruling the building inspector
but Mr. McCaferty held that the
Chancellor had only decided that the
city engineer had no right TO vote on
the question.
Mr.. Simmons thought the communi-
cation was out of order as the build
ing committee had been sustained by
the Chancellor and this in his mind
settled the matter However, on mo-
tion OF Mr.. McGovern, the subject was
referred TO Council as a committee of
the whole and Wednesday night next
fixed for a hearing. He also moved
that the owner and the architect Of the
building i'm question. the city solicitor
and the building inspector be required
to meet Council on the night fixed for
the conference. The motion was car
ried.
Mr. Connolly's letter was read as
follows:
Wilmington. Del. Sept. 21. 1905.
President and Members of City Coun-
Gil, Wilmington, Del
Gentlemen / take this method of
communicating with your honorable
body to inform you Of the differences
thai have existed and are existing be-
tween the Public Building Committee
of Council and myself and also to lay
before you the decision of the Chan
cellor in the celebrated case of the
building 1923 Market street
1 therefore wish to state that this
is what the Chancellor terms only a
Temporary injunction. and rather than
have the case carried any farther with
the Chancellor / would like your ven-
cradle body to take IL up and decide
on it by a vote Of the whole Council.
You will notice the decision of the
! Chancellor has not enlightened us
very much, as he did not decide on
the delegation Of power by Councip
which l understand was to be the par
amount question, so the stand that
took in the beginning, / still cling to,
and feel more convinced now than at
first that the old wall of the building
at 1923 Market street is still very
unsafe. as yesterday ! was watching
the construction of the iron channels
when 1 was surprised to see the wall
almost fall upon the workmen.
The questions and ordinances upon
which I made my final stand were
these:
First-The latter part Of Section Z
which says: Before any building shall
lbe enlarged or built upon, the front
taken out or any part of the first story
REPAIRED, or any material change made
therein, the owner or builder shall
notify the building inspector, who
shall examine the same and ascertain
IL the building or buildings are safe
and i'm good condition to be enlarged
raised. altered repaired or built upon
upon which, the decision of the build
ing inspector shall be final.
Second-The middle of Section z,
which says, In all business buildings
such as stores. warehouses. factories.
public school. etc, the thickness Of
loutside walls on each structure, two
stories in height. shall not be less
than thirteen inches for first and sec
.ond stories respectively
Third-Section 10, on which I
lclaim the city engineer was member
of said committee and should have
voted, which made the decision stand
three to three which 1 claimed was not
a majority.
In the first contention. the Chancel-
lor claimed that the issuing of per-
INIT for alterations and additions was.
in his opinion an admission Of an ex-
lamination which was an entirely diff
ferent conception from what l had OF
that part of the ordinance and which
looks to my mind clear and that here
after such examinations will be made
before permits are granted.
In the third contention in regard to
Section 10. the Chancellor also decided
verbally that the city engineer has no
vote whatever i'm the matter and is
not member of the Public Building
Committee.
My second contention. he says Moth
. ling whatever In regard to the thick
/ mess of walls and this is the conten-
Ition that / wish TO bring before your
honorable body and have Il decided
land which decision l shall accept as
final
The building committee has I'm my
destination. changed the ordinance
. which / claim they have no power nor
fright to do. My claim is that they
must either sustain the building in
spector or sustain the builder. or the
! laggrieved parties AS for their max
ling recommendations and suggestions
lit is strictly beyond their ability, pow
Ter and jurisdiction. l do not claim
, to be infailible nor do / wish to be
egotistical. but I do think that II the
building committee wanted any sug-
gestions they should have taken theii
g information from the building inspec-
g tor and not from outsiders. Beinl
3 appointed as I am by City Council as
their agent TO carry out the building
] ordinances and to protect not the bull.
der. the contractor or the owner but t.
. protect without malice, fear or senti.
ment. the future inhabitants Of al
lbuildings-the innocent public. Ant
= as such an agent / claim should have
r been consulted and consulted freel