Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-06-11
HEARS MORE TESTIMONY
ADDUCED BY THE CORONER
jury Listens to Statement by Owner
OF Building Which Collapsed
With Fatal Results.

Evidence of directly contradic,in~
character was offered at the continra,,o,
at the District morgue today OF the in
quest INTO the death of Richard West.
colored. one of the two men killed q, 81.
partial collapse last Tuesday OF the nev
apartment house. owned bv Thames III
Pickford, at Goth and streets.
10 Coroner Nevitt's questions Mr. Pick
1ord said he is not practical builder but
intrusted practically all of the suner-
VISION OF the work of the subcontractor.
TO Albert II. Beers. his architect. ana
'hat he received reports from Mr.. Beers
TWICE or three times weekly In one spe-
enc occasion. when he intended being out
OF the city. the witness stated he REQUEST
ed the architect to give special attention
to the building
when Mr.. Beers testified he declared
ms responsibility had ceased with tha
approval OF his pans by the District's
ouiidlng department and the issue Of the
permit He stated positively that he
hao visited the department house NOT
more than three times since II was start
eo' and on those occasions he ATTEMPTED
III no way TO supervise the work of the
supcontractors nor inspect the materials.
he denied that Mr.. Pickford had request
eo MIN at any specific time 10 look after
the work of the builders
Coroner hewitt ordered a recess from =
CLOCK until 2::D o'clock to permit the
Jury to visit and TO inspect personally
the wrecked apartment house
Two Witnesses Recalled.
BY request of Assistant United Staten
Attorney Turner the witnesses Hendrsck
and Portch were recalled at the open
! ing of the session this morning for fur
ther questioning. 1t was first established
that the iron beam on which Hendrfck
was standing when the accident happened
did not fall. but was thrown only a foot
out of line because 1t was bolted to ono
| of the columns. This corroborated the
| testimony yesterday of Harry Blake. fore
man of the Barber & Ross Company
Thomas H. Pickford, owner OF the
apartment house. was called to the stand,
and in a preliminary way he stated he is
| real estate operator. but not q prac-
| tical builder.
Il have buildings constructed for N.Y.
| self. but I always have the work done
| by subcontractors. he said "It is the
duty of the architect whom I employ to see
that the plans and specifications are OBJ
| served in every instance.
DO you reserve the right TO dismiss
any one from work on your buildings
| when it is evident he is not living up To
his agreement" Coroner hewitt inquired.
I No. That falls within the duty of the
| architect
When did you begin the building"'
April TO-
When did you propose TO have it COM
pleted?"
In October
"And was that considered sufficient time
| for the construction of house of such
size? Would it not require undue
| haste?"
mo. My architect stated that would be
ample time
Did you let the contracts in each case
| to the lowest bidders?"
Il did not. Rather the men were taken
| who had regulations for doing the best
| work. Further than that. I instructed the
| contractors to use only the best material
and do the best work. I remember tell
| ing Mr.. Reavis. the contractor for fire.
| proofing, to spare nothing-to use more
| cement if necessary, and / would pay the
| extra"
| who was your architect?" Mr.. Turner
asked.
MIR. Beers" Mr. Pickford said.
| From the fact that you were not q
practical builder you relied very largely
upon him?"
''On what basis was he TO be paid--a
percentage of the cost of the building?
mo. / expected to pay him for the
preparation of the plans and for the time
| he spent there"
| Mentions Lump Contracts.
The witness said the contracts were
lump contracts that is Barber & Rose
-