Evening star., 1922-02-08

4 large part of the forenoon session
was taken up with placing in the rec
ords the official reports Of the in
spectors on the Knickerbocker The
ater during the course of building
They were routine reports, for the
most part, and when they were not
vague in their comments, were unde-
cipherable. Several Of them did
show that there was some questiona-
BILE work in the early period OF
construction, which the inspector
threatened to stop, but the reports
did not specify the trouble. They
were put in the record by John
Ritchie, chief clerk of the building
inspectors office. Maj. e. G. Curtis,
who made practically all of these
Inspections, the jury was told, is
dead.
Roof Approved on May -. ,
Inspector Curtis report showed
that the roof was approved and "se, s.
showed that in March and April,
1917, Curtis approved the bearings
and connections" in the walls. ihat
is, he reported them o. X. on the
form report.
Little was said in the reports re-
Gordon asked Chief Clerk Richie to
examine further the reports to get
more details of examinations OF the
steel work. if they could be found;
The inquest was recessed until
pm. Coroner hewitt said, following
quest would be continued for two
or three more days. as there are a
number of witnesses who Will have
to be examined at great length.
Costixan First Witness.
The first witness today was Thomas
L. Costigan. 1923 Park road north
west, now superintendent Of street
cleaning. He remembered examining
the Knickerbocker plans in 1916, at
which time he was computing en-
gineer in the building department OF
the District.
He said he received a set Of archi-
tect's plans Questioned as to the
method of examining these plans he
said first they examined the audi
after that they go ahead in the case
of theater with the structural fea-
lures.
DO you take in the security Of the
huilding?" asked Coroner hewitt.
Yes, sir"
DO you know whether the building
went up according to the plans?'
Coroner Nevitt asked.
No, sir; that was a matter for the
field inspectors" the witness an
swered.
Would Have Suspended Work.
Asked if any discrepancy was dis
covered by field inspector he should
lave reported to the department. the
witness reply was in the affirmative
In that case, he continued, the build
ing work would have been suspended
He said, however. that he had not
seen the plans since he passed on
them as computer. The plans are gen.
orally submitted as an architectural
layout. These are gone over gen.
orally, he said. Conditions were
made to fit the job as 1t went along
bility was taken care of as the job
He named the field inspectors at the
time as Maj Curtis. Messrs. Selden,
Proctor, Hunt, Kern and Ncidoman-
ski.
How Plans Were Examined.
Taken in hand by Maj. Gordon and
questioned as to how the plans were
computed. the witness said that he
examined them for wall construction,
framing, etc.
was it your duty to determine
whether walls were OF certain thick
According to regulations. yes, SIR
Did you have anything to do with
the steel iplans?"
Yes, sir"
The witness here was handed q SET
of plans by Maj. Gordon.
Are they the plans you 0. k'd?'
Yes, sir"
Are they the ones for which the
permit was issuedT
Il don't know" the witness at hrst
said and then added. Il think so.n,
Later Plan Of Root.
He added that there was a later plan
for the roof than the one shown him
by Maj. Gordon.
Some time was spent in examining
the various plans and marking them
as exhibits for the record. The wit
ness identified them as the ones he
passed on and 20. K. d." They covered
the walls. roof, roof framing or iron
work, etc.
Approved Basement Plan.
Mr.. Costigan identified the base
ment plana approved in 1916 by him.
as covering the construction under
the auditorium.
What did you go over that plan
for, to. approve it7" NAL Gordon
Alksd