New Britain herald., 1926-04-01
COMMUNICATED
BACKWARD OR FORWARD
Earl K, Bishop Expresses Opinions
 on Plumbing Code


 on Plumbing Code
 MarchESl. 1926.
 Editor New Britain Herald:
 The old slogan Of the plumbing organization Is now being heard again. "For the sake of the public health" It is their broadside of defense and has always succeeded in making the public settle back and declare q truce. There Is hardly n year goes by but that there are ad- ditional and stifler plumbing laws laid down and the public pays as usual, The plumbers say they arc satistiod with the present code. Why shouldn't they be? Every new plumbing installation costs more than the one before. Both tho labor charges and materials used in any one installation cost more due to greater quantities of each and greater costs Of each. The present plumbing ordinances maintain the greater quantities of material and greater sizes of material. And why ara these larger sizes and extra fit tinss and greater amounts of pipe required? Becaus ethe trade will not admit that reductions can be made with safety as has been thoroughly proven through two year period of tests conducted by the T.. s. Bureau of Standards. IL is the first time in the history of the plumbing business that d con- prehensive scientific study of plumb Ing systems has been made and the results have thoroughly justified the course Our present New Britain 1 plumbing ordinances have been built and padded up without any ade- quate scientific foundation.
 Of course the defense is,--tha' practical experiences is the baisis O. all rules. It Is good defense l but the writer maintains that plumbing regulations that are car 1 ried too far are unjust. Govern ment has right 10 protect the peoples health, but people also have their rights Regulations which will not be supported by the courts ] fully under liberal interpretation of the police power may be regarded as unjust Sanitary science, there. fore, must bs the guide to justice in this matter, The plumbing or ganization of New Britain Is satis. 1 tied to continue In the old channe and 1t is regrettable that there are l not more than one or two of Its members who will take the time tc really study their subject. Wha' we need is a minimum code for pro tection instead Of maximum code as we now have.
 Why not recognize this work 0, the Department of Commerce an4 the Bureau of Standards and the Committee directly responsible fol the exhaustive results obtained This committee with George Whipplt as chairman was composed of the biggest men in the industry not only sanitary engineers, but plumbing contractors and representatives iron the American Federation of Labor Not only theoretical man but prac tical men who once served theil time as apprentices.
 Their study and tests Of plumbing systems were conducted under ever! conceivable condition, conditions ap pIicable in the small dwelling anc in the large factory building. Tht results obtained show that we arr out of line and we have been out O line because up 10 the present VI have had no definite data witt which to obtain fair minimum regu lations.
 Their tentative report of 1922 Wa signed by all except William Spencer who presented the minorit, report favoring individual venting of traps, but he concurred in tn 'rest Of the tentative report. Mi Spencer was a representative iron the American Federation of Labor
 It seems that In view of the loca plumbing organizations animosit towards any change in regulation