Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-11-28
BUILDING METHODS
UNDER SHARP FIRE
AShf0rd'S Ignorance of Details
of Office Develops.
CRITICISM BY JURYMEN
Somerville Repudiates Signature to
Report on Structure.
CURTIS ALSO IS WITNESS
Suggests That Papers Were Tam
pered With After Accident-Ash-
ford Explains Isham's Dis
missal. s.

Three separate versions of what "All
right. go ahead" means in regard to put.
ting up building
The charge that some one forged 20. H.,
Somerville," to an inspectors report OF
a building on which no permit had been
granted.
Admitted surprise by juryman at what
seemed evident looseness in the building
inspectors Office.
Test of the tensile strength Of the
wrecked material is going on today. and
there was no such test before the acci-
dent
Denial that Isham. the discharged in
spector had any right to inspect the steel,
and subsequent evidence that his inspec-
ton was expected.
The statement that Inspector Somerville
had expected to inspect all the steel men,
bers in patches and afterward inspected
just one piece
The charge that Building Inspector
Ashford knew the collapsed building was
going up.
The charge that Computer Somerville
asked Isham to stand in with him.
These points might be called the chief
evidence brought out by Coroner hewitt
and his jury in the inquest over the body
of Raymond Hibbs. who met his death
i'm fha nf he of
North Capitol and NJ streets Monday.
Methods Under Scrutiny.
All of today the examination has ap-
peared more to be an examination into
the methods Of the office of the building
inspector. And, yesterday afternoon.
startling charges We're made against both
Ashford. the building inspector. and c.
w. Somerville. the computer of the office.
That Ashford was well aware of the
erection of the steel work was charged
by d former field inspector, w. s. Isham.
who was discharged after the accident
1sham's testimony bristled with condem-
nation of the department. He declared q
man had to become a liar to stay in it.
He declared that ne made reports to his
"
building. Reports bearing his signature
were introduced to the jury.
One of these has indorsed on it that the
structure Leaned to the north Another
one was marked mo permit. Q. X. Som
erville." Altogether the discussion OF
these reports has brought into the record
a mass of contradictory testimony.
Ashford Denies knowledge.
Ashford never saw any Of the reports
hot G,,lx.
vious to his saying so he said he knew
nothing OF any building or any inspection
going on in the premises in question
1t was shown that if his statement is
correct reports of a building were being
sent in and reaching high officials in his
office and he knew nothing about the
building
Maj. Curtis. one of Mr. Ashford's lieu
tenants. testified today that the reports
had been tampered with, and that some
of the Endorsements were placed thereon
after the accident. He was positive on
this point.
Today Mr.. Somerville stated that he en-
pected to inspect all the steel to be used
In the fated building. He said that while
it was being taken down from the Penn
sylvania train sheds he determined to
have the girders inspected in patches Of
six.
Inspected One Piece Only.
Later on he told the jury that it was
not up to him to inspect it. but he had
inspected one piece. Then he was asked
why he let the work go on when he had
not inspected the steel. He said he
thought Isham was to inspect it.
Yesterday If was stated that Isham
had no right TO inspect the steel, and
il has been understood that Isham was
discharged because he exceeded his au-
thority. All lie did was to inspect the
steel and. according to his own state
ment. report OH it.
The building regula. ions of the District
require that steel with n certain tensile
strength be used. Mr.. Somerville Is hav-
ing piece from the wreckage tested at
the bureau of standards There was no
test Of that particular kind before the
accident.
Mr.. Somerville stated that no test to
determine whetl ler not the steel had
that tensile strength was ever made be
fore building.
Curtis Is First Witness.
The first witness called today was Maj
Curtis, to whom Isham made written re-
ports on the progress of the wrecked
building.
He testified that Isham's duties were
confined to inspecting the concrete on the
building. He had to admit that in the
reports made by Isham was evidence that
steel was being put up. Maj. Curtis said
he did not know at the time that Isham
was detailed only to the concrete work.
He read one report, of November Is.
the gist OF which was that concrete work
was going on and ten columns had been
put up The report was marked 20. IL.
Somerville." added after the catastrophe,
according to the major.
Il do not think he exceeded his author.
ity when he reported things were not all
right 1t was his duty he said, in re-
gard TO ISham.
Evidence showed that the routine of the
building inspectors office had been fol-
lowed by Maj. Curtis. He said it was not
his duty to inquire further after Inspector
lshams reports.
Witness and Jury Tilt.
There ensued a lively little tilt between
Maj. Curtis and Juryman Sanford over
the report on which was indorsed the In
formation that the structure was leaning
to the north. The date of the report wo0