The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1911-12-20
OBJECTS
TO HOPK|NSON
COMING HERE
COUNTY ARCHITECT SAYS HIS
WORK WILL STAND TEST, BUT
DOES NOT WANT NEW YORK
MAN WITH WHOM HE Is NOT
FRIENDLY, TO cRITIcIsE IT.

Claiming that he had been treated in
| an unprofessional manner by the men,
bers of the board of county commits
sioners when the board had, without
| consulting or notifying him, employed
| another architect to inspect the new
county jail building, Architect L. R
Benz made some rather sweeping
charges at yesterday mornings session
of the board.
The meeting yesterday morning was
special one, being called for the pur-
pose of inspecting the Jail building and
the board notified Architect Benz that
Geo. NJ. HopkinSon, of New York, had
been employed to assist the commits
sioners in checking up the work done
on the building. The architect imme-
diately raised an objection, saying that
professional courtesy demanded that
he be given more notice of such
move on the part of the commissioners
than had been given him, and asked
that the inspection be put off until to-
day. However, the board declined to
grant his request and made an inspec-
ton yesterday afternoon, the result Of
which will not be known until the
meeting this morning.
NOT FRIENDLY WITH HOPklNSON
Geo. NJ. Hopkinson, who is mem
Der of the firm of Stoddart & Co., was
the architect on the San Carlos hotel
building and is well known in Pensa
COLA but according to the statement of
Mr.. Benz to the board. he and Hop
kinson have not been on friendly
terms and for this reason, the archi-
tect on the county Jail building OBJ
jects to having him criticise his work,
and said he would rather have any five
architects in the country pass upon his
work than Hopkinson.
Benz claims that at, the time the
plans for the jail building were re-
jected by j. NJ. Johnson, who was the
city building Inspector at that time,
which was before the work on the
building began, it was really Hopkin-
son who turned down his plans. which
he claims was done without sufficient
reason. At the time the plans were
turned down, the building inspector is
said to have submitted them to Hop
kinson's firm before approving them,
and Benz claims that he rejected them
on the advice of Hopkinson.
Architect Benz claims further that
Hopkinson and the building inspector
criticised his plans in print before
notifying the board of the decision,
since which time he and Hopkinson
have not been on friendly terms and
that, therefore, it is doing him an in
Justice to employ this particular archi-
tect to inspect and criticise his work.
OBJECTS TO COMPETITOR.
Addressing the meeting, Mr.. Benz
said, among other things:
'Tf / have not complied with my
duties and if the board is not satisfied
with the work done, they can employ
two, three or five men to help me out,
but do not bring a man down here wSo
was competitor of mine. l request
that the inspection be held off until to-
morrow"
On motion of Geo. H. Davis. it was
ordered that the inspection be held
yesterday afternoon, the board having
already notified the attorneys of the
Blount Construction Co., contractors
NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR.
Concerning the matter of employing
an architect to assist the commission
ers in making the inspection of the jail
building, F. NJ. Blount, representing
the Blount Construction Co, said that
the company was willing for the board
TO appoint any representative desired
and that he would assist the represen-
tative in any way possible in going
over the work. but that before doing
so he would require the proper au-
thority from the board.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Blounts re-
marks, the following letter was ordered
addressed to his company
1.-The Blount Construction Co. City.
Gentlemen This is to inform you
that the bearer, Geo. NJ. Hopkinson,
mas Deen employed ny the DOaTu OI
county commissioners of Escambia
county to assist them, in checking up
the plans specifications and contract
of the new court house and Jail build
ing
MEETING AT THIS MORNING.
Before adjourning, it was decided
that a meeting should be held this
morning at 8 O'Clock for the purpose of
discussing the result of the inspection
yesterday afternoon.
It is understood that this inspection
is not to be considered aff1nal one.