New Britain herald., 1914-07-16
RUTHERFORD SECURE
 1 AS BLDG. INSPECTOR
(Continued From First Page.)


 (Continued From First Page.) locked again replied the inspector.
 Answer me. yes or no" asked At torney McDonough.
 Remedy Is Suggested.
 Well now, MT. Rutherford, what would you do to remedy this thing?" asked the attorney.
 Asaa..I,d- have a fire escape on each side in the center to take care of the rear tenants. explained Inspector. Ruther- ford. sht4
 Never Sent Notice.
 Have you ever sent Mrs Wisk a notice ordering her to do that?" was the next: question asked by the law yer.
 x ss'No,,' replied MT. Rutherford. .That's:al want to ask.'' conclud ! ed Lawyer McDonough.
 a Legal Point Brought Out.
 He then explained the wording of ,<i1e law. which states that to be in violation of the law building must 1 be s'so constructed'' that there is but ' one means of egress for the tenants. ! i.awyer McDonough contended that l because there are doors leading from 1 one room to another by which it is 5 possible to go from the rear to the l front of the house and vice versa lrhe house is not "so constructed" as to A,n ake but one way of egress possible.
 .Ex-Building Inspector Called.
 se Ex- Building Inspector August Berg strom was the next witness, and he isaid that he knows Mary Wisk and l rec alled when the house was con- tstructed about two years ago. It was IaJ ssix tenement house, he said. He leXplained that on the first floor there is a. tenement of six rooms on the Jspnth side and another of five rooms ton the north side. On the second floor he said that the hallway from lthe rear is cut off by the stairway lea ding to the third floor. However, Between the rooms each side there lis a little private hallway, he added. 2, Here. Attorney McDonough inter pupted the. case to state that if Build k1g Inspector Rutherford takes the etand that every public building or Tenement. house: must have a hallway Irnnning straight through them it will the necessary for him to bring in al-
 
 EOwTi.-z That would be a serious mat ter" he said. Again he called at kention to the wording of the law eaying that house must be so con- btructed "as to prevent two means of egress to be in violation" He called attention to the fact that the mum Iber of people occupying a house does mot. make. any difference in it's con ktruction. He also o4declaredl that the Inspector must use his discretion.
 .s5s State Attorneys View.
 In reply to the IegaI' quoting of At torney McDonpugh showing that the house was not .ssos constructed" as to be in violation of the law, Pros- ecutor KIett said that the purpose of the law was to provide safety for the people ,in~ case ofefire or any other calamity and.The claimed that in this house there are ten or eleven fam flies with but one means Of egress in case of fire. We claim that the people in the rear of the second floor are entitled to fire escape; or more than one way, of egress. The de- M&nse claims that if the doors ase unlocked there is this way of egress. That is ridiculous. The people liv- ing in the. southeast corner of this house in order to get out would have to go through a little hallway anG Through a kitchen and bed room and Otits the front way, through four different doors. beca use the @stairwa5 ko the third floor cuts off this hall way. If these tenants want to havc their doors unlocked and opened all right but there is only one stairway, objected the states attorney.
 Lawyer McDonough declared tn t 1sIosecutor klett has shot high of 1fis mark" and again explained that hfie-vfi lid rftetef- of the building is not changed isy the means to which it is put. The fact that the doors may be locked does lot change it's con- HtFuction If the rear tenants should De cut aff they could get out through fhe front entrance and the same with tAose in the front if they were cut pR declared the lawyer for the de- I've are not charged with putting Ri building to a use it was not in- ksnded for We are charged with not providing : means of ingress and egress,'' concluded the, attorney.
 Must Decide Legally.
 sJudge Mangan then spoke, saying ssas this is d criminal, action Lit must be in favor of the defense as the Building is shown to have two ways of regress on each door," However, klie judge said that he had not the slightest doubt but that when the law was drafted it was meant to protect life, but as the action was a criminal one it must : be judged strictly ac- cording to the statute.
 Whether or not each room should have a means of escape is up to the building inspector, declared Lawyer McDonouEn, and he then asked MT. Bergstron,, who was still on the stand,