Evening star., 1926-02-14
is BACK AGAIN.
AS SCOT AND SOFT COAL REIGN
Hasn't the Monopoly of
Old Days as Housewives
Learn to Use Salt.
MOderns Clean Flues From
Outside and Getting
Higher Wage.

The chimney-sweep. long thought
to he as extinct as the dodo. is stag
ing a remarkable come back"
The profession-or is it an art
owes its renaissance to the coal
strike. The members of the revived
fraternity, In fact, are the only per
sons who are hoping the miners and
operators will keep right on disagree
ing.
Back in the days when chimneyS
We're chimneys, with ample room for
chimney sweeps or Santa Claus to
crawl up and down. the sweep
worked from the inside out. Now he
works from the outside in.
In those days, 1t was recalled today
by DR.. William Tindall. veteran Dis.
tract official, chimney sweeping was
compulsory. The mayor of Washing
ton was required to appoint two SUI
perfntendents of chimney sweeps.
whose duty it was, in person or by
proxy. to keep the ChilnneyS and
fiueS of the city free from SCOT
Under d municipal ordinance pro-
mulgated in 1853 one superintendent
looked after chimneys in the first
second and third wards and the other
chased SCOT in the fourth, fifth. sixth
and seventh wards. The regulation.
stated that II shall be the duty OF
the superintendent each month. from
November | to May l, and every Two
months the remainder of the year. 10
inspect every inhabited home within
his ward or wards and thoroughly
sweep or ScrHpe, or cause the same
TO be done. every chimney or hue
thereof in which fire shall. about the
time or the visit, appear to have been
used"
The ordinance made it lawful for
n a
sum Of 20 cents for each story Of
every chimney swept
II was the duty of the Superin-
tendents of chimney sweeps, further
more. Ito scrape thoroughly the flues
of all newly built houses within
their respective wards
Penalties We're provided. not only
for refusal of Il housekeeper to allow
his chimney TO be swept, but for
failure of the superintendents TO at
tend TO their duties properly.
Chimney.Sweeps Fined.
IF. in consequence of any neglect
or refusal on the part of the superin-
tendents to perform their duties" the
regulation read, 'soot in any Chin
ney shall take fire so as to bla ze
from the top thereof. such superin-
tendent shall moreover forfeit and
pay a fine Of s. for each offense."
A similar fine was levied against
the owner who refused to permit the
chimney-sweep to clean his flues, and
the owners were not allowed to burn
straw. hay. shavings or other light
combustible material in their CHM
neys.
1t was unlawful. also. "for any
body but the superintendent of
chimney-sweeps or persons employed
by them to sweep chimneys in this
city for hire or gain. under pen
atty Of SEQ for each offense"
AS evidence of the commodious
proportions of most of the chimneys
of that day, the penalty against fues
taking fire was not enforced when
it shall appear that the chimneys
or fues of such house are not of
sufficient capacity to admit of their
being entered for the purpose of
sweeping"
The old law was abolished in 1900,
DR.. Tindall said.
Old-timers at the District Building
also recalled that persons who want.
ed the services of a sweep" filed
their request with the Fire Depart
ment. When telephones came into
vogue the operator on the fire board
was assigned the duty Of taking down