The Washington times., 1905-01-13
BIG CONTRACTORS
IN CAHOOTS WITH
ASHFORD, He SAYS
Nash Declares Building
Inspector Has Shown
Partlality.
DENIAL COMES. PROMPT
Accused Official Defends At
titude on Bill to License
Builders.
DENIAL COMES. PROMPT

Charges against Building Inspector
Snowden Ashford are preferred by An
drew O. Nash, builder and property
owner, as a result of the bill before
Congress to establish a master build |
ers examining board.
Mr.. Nash alleges the Building In
spector has been partial to the So
called building trust in the admin
istration of his Office
Ashford Did It.
He holds Mr.. Ashford largely respon-
sible for the introduction of the bill in
the House, and declares emphatically
that the measure was drafted wholly
IN the interest of the clique of larger
builders and contractors in the city.
Mr.. Ashford is equally as emphatic
IN mis- denial of the charges preferred
by Mr. Nash. He contradicts the state
ment that he has used his Office In be-
half of the bigger building interests
and says Mr.. Nash has been laboring
under a false impression in the belief
that he CMr. Ashford) gave his indorse-
ment to the bill
Carpenters Opposed.
Wednesday night a mass meeting was
held under the auspices of the local
Union and Brotherhood of Carpenters
and Joiners. to protest against the bill
By unanimous vote of the union
committee of five was appointed to con-
fer with members of Congress In re-
gard to entering formal protest against
the passage of the measure.
Charges Discrimination.
Another vigorous opponent of the bill
to establish a builders examining board
is Andrew o. Nash, property owner ard
| builder, who believes the movement to
be an attempt to establish almost
monopoly on the trade in Washington
Mr.. Nash also has a word of denun-
citation of Building Inspector Snowden
Ashford on the ground that that or
cial has shown some partiality in his
/ official capacity to the larger building
| interests of the city
1t cant be denied that the Office of
ton" said Mr.. Nash to a reporter of
The Times today. It is no doubt a
difficult task to prepare regulations that
won't embarrasS or prove unsatisfactory
TO somebody.
First Accords Praise.
Mr.. Ashford deserves credit for
having arranged the regulations in a
manner that precludes the possibility of
poor construction in the District, and up
to the present In manner that has met
with reasonable amount of satisfac-
J ton
! But he should be criticised for Civ
ing his Endorsement TO bill framed in
! the interest of q few large contractors
With whom he seems anxious TO curry
| favor.
"I don't believe Mr. Ashford has bene-
fitted financially by the project, but ii
certainly does seem like making use of
| a public office to dispense favors-
Cites an Instance.
"Ashfords fidelity to the trust now
! developing is shown by the regula tior
requiring thirteen-inch wall in the
construction of all party walls in the
District. This not only makes the COS,
CT building much greater than ii was
before tne regulation was adopted but
IS also particularly advantageous 10 all
big contra ctors-
Mr. Nash also expressed the opinion
tnat the Dill serves, furthermore as
/ = shield to q trades union movement
He believes that the provisions of the
bill are IN harmony with plan to OBJ
tain indirect official sanction to the meth
DDS of labor organizations. It's effect
he believes, would be to concentrate
architects, labor unions, and master
builders into a fraternity which would
hold ii monopoly on the building indus
try III Washington.
Unionism Interested
| 1t Is my honest opinion" said Mr.
Nash, that the trades unions have some
what taken an active part In this move
ment. L believe that If the bill were 10
become a law the spirit of organized
. | labor would find Its way into the per
sonnel of the examining board. and thar
the lot of smaller builder would be
embarrassing were he to try the ex-
aminattous for q license"
, Mr.. Nash said that instead of estab-
fishing an examining board il would be
more satisfactory To add to the effici-
: ency of the building inspectors Office
? by increasing the number of inspectors
, and rearrange their duties 50 that they
] would be In the field, instead of about
half their time in the Office.
> The trouble would be obvfated." he
8 continued, IF the staff OF inspectors
were increased. and If the inspectors
We're kept at work during the day max
I ing examinations"
Examination a Hardship.
He said further. that the proposed
regulation would be hardship on most
builders because OF their inability Il
pass Il theoretical examination
= Few men engaged In the construction
trade in Washington. he said. are Quail.
| fed to answer difficult questions of z
: technical nature, which would probably
. be put TO them by the board although
5 most Of them may be good mechanics.
i Ashford Answers
i Building Inspector Ashford. wher
a told OF the charges made by Andrew o
Nash laushingiy remarked that tn.
arraignment seemed to be a sort O.
q | weathervane affair which pointed boti
S ways
He seems to have lined me up witt
| the trusts and the labor unions al tn.
. ! same time. said the District officia
J. Il don't object In the least to that
J. (Contiraed on Third Page