The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-11-30
INSPECTOR FIRED
AFTER TESIIFYING


he found him absent from the work
on Thirtieth street and insisted that
there was evidence of unfair dealing:
that tho inspector had been given an
other sewer TO build and after he had
given prejudicial evidence the engi-
neer had gone back to an old oTense
as a pretense to discharge him. Later
In the evening Chairman Lynch asked
city Engineer Boiling whether he con-
sidered Mir. Atkinson competent in
spector.
Knows His Business.
Mr.. Boiling replied that from what
no had seen OF his work he knew his
business, but had been very negligent
on Broad street. that 1t was probably
true that his work had been too much
scattered, and there should have been
an inspector on that work all the
time, but that an inspector coming
there every few hours should have
been able to detect the gross errors
which were afterwards found to have
been committed by the pipe laying
gang, and the eScayating contractor,
J. j. Smith & Company The inspec-
tors action. said Mr. Boiling, in block
ing the sewer, was evidence that there
was something wrong. and 1T should
have been looked into at once There
were gaps in the tunnels where no
dirt had been pvt back on the pipe at
all, Mr. Boiling said
Outrageous, says Lynch.
Leaving tic chair, Mr.. Lynch warm
~ denounced as ii persecution the ac-
tlon OF Assistant Engineer Bolton, in
discharsing Mr.. Atkinson. holding that
II was outrageous COR the engineer in
charge of sewers to take such action
merely because the man had testified
before the inyestisating committee.
and had then tried to base his action
on the charge that Atkinson had been
loaanS on former job months ago.
II would hate 10 see any man lose
his fob for coming here ana telling
This committee tho truth" asserted
Chairman Lynch. IF there has been
any negligence 1t was on the part of
Mr.. Bolton for not discharging this
man when he was found absent from
his work, not Kidding 1t over him until
months afterwards when ne tells facts
that are not palatable TO the engineer
in charge OF sewers II looks like a
persecution to me. and. in my view
Assistant Engineer Bolton should be
SHARPLY reprimanded by the head of
the Office, and Mr.. Atkinson ghould be
reinstated."
Mr.. Don Leavy agreed that II Mr..
Atkinson were not competent II was a
reflection on somebody that he had
years.
Boiling Lncks Authority.
Cfty Engineer Boiling stated that
in his view II was essential that the
present ordinances be changed so as
to give authority TO the department,
head. This was In response TO sew
cral questions b. Mr.. Jones as to i'm.
provcments that could be introduced.
Mr. Boiling was certain that many
improvements could be introduced and
that from the evidence already submit
ted he was OF the opinion that he was
not getting the best service from some
OF the engineers under his charge
though he considered all OF them capa'
bic men. Two engineers had testified
riat they were not occupied for al
their time, and Mr.. Boiling said tina
had that becS known 70 him there wa!
an abundance OF work that could b'
done to keep them busy He did no
think the city work could get alons
with any less force, but thought tina