Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-02-01
DAWSON CLEARS
D. c. INSPECTORS
Building Crashes Not Caused
by Their Failure to Do
Duty, He Says.

Recent fatal accidents occurring dur
ing tearing down Of old buildings and
construction of new ones were in no
case caused by failure of District build
ing inspectors to carry on their duties,
Assistant Engineer Commissioner Dom
aid A. Dawson said today.
Maj. Dawson, who has executive con-
troll Of the building inspectors Office,
said that the fault found with the in
spectors by Ethelbert Stewart, commits
Sloner OF labor statistics of the Labor
department., in recent issue of the
Monthly Labor Review, was based on an
entirely false premise.
Mr.. Stewart holds that the building
inspectors are responsible for the con-
struction methods followed by the con-
tractors" Maj. Dawson said "They
have no responsibility and should nave
none. This Is the responsibility of the
superintendent of construction, and If
his methods are faulty, they should be
checked up by the engineering inspectors
OF the casualty companies, who under
write the risks. to the workmen. All
the accidents mentioned by Mr.. Stewart
are traceable to construction methods.
Cites Example of Work.
ITO take simple example of the
building inspectors duties, let us con-
slider that the building plan as approved
by the inspectors Office force calls for a
15-foot steel beam to be placed in a
ceiling. The municipal inspector sees
the beam lying on the floor before being
put into place. 1t Is his duty to see
that the beam Is steel and is Is feet
long. The superintendent of construc-
ton on the job then has his men put
the beam into the ceiling. It is then
the building inspectors duty to see that
the beam is put where the plans APP
proved by the Office call for 1t and that
1t is properly supported, according to
the plans. He has nothing whatever to
do with the way the beam is put in
place. That is the sole responsibility of
the building construction superintendent,
checked by the casualty companys in
spector. If the beam should fall through
careless handling and kill q number of
workers the building inspector could in
no contingency be blamed for 1t.
ITO take another example, one of the
accidents blamed on the inspectors Of
flce by Mr.. Stewart resulted from a
cave-in, accompanied by the collapse of
La wooden snoring, that killed two men.
This occurred before any duty on that
particular part of the job devolved upon
the building inspector at all. The cave
In was caused by digging in the ground
on the INSIDE Of the snoring. The
workers were :squaring up holes in
which concrete was to be poured. The
inspectors duties did not begin until the
concrete was mixed. He was to see that
the concrete was Of the proper, mix
and was placed in excavations in loca-
tons called for by the plans.
Holds Comparative Death Rate Low.
mfr. Stewart complains of the high
risk to workers in the building trades
here. Actually, agree with Mr.. Stew
art, because believe that if single
worker were to be killed In 10 years
the death rate would be far too high
But, comparatively. our accident rate
here Is very low. We have had
$5,000,000 and $6,000,000 in building
operations going on here every month
recently, and am certain that 1t will
be found that our accident rate COM
pares favorably with that in any city
with a similar activity"
Maj. Davidson said he had incor-
porated these views in lengthy re-
port to Engineer Commissioner William
B. Ladue.