Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-11-28
Counsel Choke Off Answer.
Coroner Questions Ashford
Regarding Building Collapse

Coroner Questions Ashford
Regarding Building Collapse
At the session late yesterday afternoon
OF the coroner's inquest investigating the
collapse of the Nj street building. Snow
den Ashford, inspector of buildings of the
District of Columbia, was witness
Among other things. he declared he never
granted permit verbally for any con-
struction work; that policemen are not
authorized to allow work to proceed I'M
less permits are issued; that Inspector
Isham was entitled to a hearing before
the Commissioners before dismissal; that
if a permit had been issued the accident
might have happened in just the same
way; that no doubt existed of the
strength or quality of the material to go
into the building. and that the cause OF
the accident was straining of the south
guy lines when the last truss was raised.
Mr.. Ashford was asked by the coroner
to give brief history of the building, as
far as he knew it.
Some time in October" he said, the
gentlemen filed an application to con-
sttruct this building, and asked to have
the steel or iron trusses at the 9th street
station examined to ascertain whether
they were suitable for use in the new
building. \ most careful and painst king
examination was made. l think every
portion OF it was gone over. and some OF
it was rejected. Other portions were per-
mitted TO be used; and in order to IA
q RI
put in the concrete foundations, with the
understanding that no work was to be
done beyond the foundations
No Permit Given.
ibid You give any permit. verbal or
otherwise. to erect the iron work that
was erected:" the witness was asked.
NO. sir" was the reply.
Last Friday afternoon, Mr.. Donaldson
and Mr. Hill called at the office, and as
they had transacted their business with
| the computer--
Mr.. Somerville?"
Mr. Somerville. yes. His sole duty
was to pass upon the quality of the steel
work. Mr.. Somerville has no authority
or duty with respect to permits. He
passes solely upon the structural condi-
lions Of the steel or ironwork
They came to my desk, and Mr.. Som
erville informed me that, so far as he was
concerned. everything was all right. Mr..
Donaldson turned to me and asked me if
he could get his permit. / found that
there was some little technicality-Some-
thing wanting in the permit-so / told
that he could then go ahead and get his
permit. But there was no permission
given to go ahead with the work He
| was instructed to obtain his permit i
believe he applied for his permit and
| found that there was some paper miss
| ing, which required a postponement and
that was supplied the next day. On Mon
day or Tuesday his permit was issued"
You said he could go ahead if certain
| technicalities were remeded, is that the
| idea?' the coroner remarked.
Yes, sir" Mr.. Ashford replied.
After discussing the technicalities in the
Applicant don for the permit, Mr.. Ashford
| was asked:
l. Meaning of Permit
| ibid you ever grant a permit verbally
for any constructiOn."
81 never have. SIR he answered. "It
would be impossible to grant a permit
verbally. You could not do it. 4 per-
init Is simply IA notification to the po-
lice rnd other inspectors that work is
authorized to proceed"
| Suppose you told them that they could
proceed with the work before a permit
was gotten out in its entirety?"
! 1T would have no effect at all. be-
| cause it would have to go beyond the
| bounds of the Office. A permit is simply
a notification that the work is author
| lied. and verbal permit would be use
! less
! What connection did Alr. 1sham have
with the case" the coroner asked
| Il really do not know what his con-
nection with II is
! He was connected with your office?''
| ''He was the inspector in charge of the
| concrete work.
| Did he have anything to DO with the
| iron construction work."
No Connection With Ironwork.
| He had nothing 10 do with ii officially
Did you know in any way, prior to the
accident. that the erection of this iron
work had been begun
! mo. sir: did not know it. i was told or
Monday morning. | was just about to leav,
| the office with the Commissioners to IN
spect some schools. when / was told tina
| building had fallen down as a result o
| fire. which I suppose. was due to the fac
| that the fire department was called out
| ] Immediately had the permit clerk searcl
| the records. and he found no permit TO
! any building in that locality. | did no
! understand how building could hav,
| fallen down before permit was issued
| | went up there with the Commissioner
! and looked over the ground, and tina
! was the first ] knew that the trusse
| were. in place or had been in place
| Did you know that the ironwork wa
being erected prior 20 the fall on Monda,
morning.?
NO. sir: did not"
You say that man, While lie wa
connected with the District service hat
no authority or connection with this cas-
| other than that lie was the inspector o
conCrete?
THAT is all
Responsibility of Isham.
/ Suppose he had made report, at an!
time while the construction OF the build
| ing was In progress, in regard TO any par
| of the work other than the concrete, anC
| had reported To you that il was not adj
visable to proceed WITH il. what woul,
/ you have done under the circumstances
he being an inspector of concrete
| IF he had reported to me | should I'M
mediately have notified him that the per
| nit WAS not issued and that I could no
| take cogniZance of it until IT was issued.
| He was directly responsible 10 whom?
i He was directly responsible 10 Ma j
Curtis. the head inspector
| Had he reported the various circum
stances connected with this building Il
Nci Curtis. would ii have been the
majors duty TO report the matter tC