Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-10-23
COURT HOLDS VALID
D. c. REGULATIONS
Builders Must Conform to
Rules Laid Down by
Commissioners.

The building regulations of the Dis
trict Of Columbia were today upheld by
Judge Mullowny In the Police Court, the
Judge overruling a motion to quash any
information charging an offense under
these regulations.
Attorney George c. Gertman, represent
ing Clinton c. Smithson. who was
cha ged with erecting a shed with ut
having obtained a permit to do so, noted
an exception to. the ru ng, and gave
notice of intention to apply for writ
of error The case will be tried on the
facts within a week or two.
The question of the validity Of the
building regulations has long been @
mooted one and numerous attorneys
have firmly believed that the Commits
sioners were without power to enforce
observance of these regulations.
Judge Has Studied Precedents.
The question was brought up several
months ago by Attorneys Gertman and
Robert 1. Miller in the case of Charles
H. Javins. charged with an offense SIM
ilar to that charged against Smithson
The principal foundation for the claim
that the regulations were invalid and
void was that no penalty for viola
tons was prescribed by law. That case
was nolle pressed.
During the past two weeks Judge
Mullowny has spent nearly every after
noon and several evenings In the
library of the Bar Association consult
ing presidents and parallel cases
finally finding ample authority. he said
today. to rule against the motion to
ouash the information.
Interpretation of Law.
In overru ing the motion today
Judge MuHowny said: Under the bare
power conferred on the Commission
ers to make and enforce building regu-
lations, which was given them by an
ct of Congress in 1878. it is doubtful
if this court would have the power to
impose a fine or send any one to jail
for falling to comply with such regu-
lations.
Nevertheless, by we'll established
principles of law, a penalty could be
attached under the power given cor
porations to make such regulations.
However, without the penalty spe-
officially provided for a matter of this
sort would have to be regarded a s a
breach of contract between the Dis
rict of Columbia and the person liv
ing in 1t convicted of violating these
regulate and civil process would be
the only course the District could take
But a joint resolution Of Congress In
1882 covers the whole ground in such a
way that there remains no question in
my mind as to the legality of making
violations of the building regulations a
criminal offense.
Gave Commissioners Power.
THAT resolution conferred on the Com
missioners the power to make regula-
tons for the protection of the lives,
limbs health, comfort and quiet of the
citizens of the District of Columbia, and
to protect their property.
"The Court of Appeals has already
ruled on a case similar in many re-
spects to the motion which 1 have
overruled. In 1901 druggist named
Mertz. who had cut a door through
his wall to connect with. the theater
next his premises, was fined $40 in
this court, and motion to quash fled
The upper court sustained the Police
Court ruling, on precisely the same
grounds I have overruled this motion
today"