Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-05-02

by weakening the footings of the
columns of steel and making them I'M
safe"
In his formal statement, Mr.. Todd
points out that these two conditions
were those over which his concern had
no control, but which were entirely
within the jurisdiction Of the National
Construction Co. and the municipal
architects office. The Heron Todd Co.,
the preparatory work and were advised
to refrain from criticizing work which
was not its responsibility.
Should Follow Plans.
ITO all complaints made by the
Heron Todd Construction Co. about the
Roosevelt School job" Mr.. Todd's state
ment continues, "they were informed
that they were merely the subcontrac-
tors to do the steel work, that the Ma
ttonal Construction Co. was the general
contractor, that it was the duty Of the
Heron Todd Construction Co. to erect
the steel in accordance with the plans
and specifications, and that the anchor
bolts used in the footingS, ETC., was In
accordance with the plans approved by
representatives of the Municipal Archl-
tects's ONCE, and that the Heron Todd
Construction Co. should erect accord
ing to the plans, and not criticize the
National Construction Co. and the
Municipal Architects ONCE"
Continuing with his summary OF the
reasons for the collapse Of the steel, Mr..
Todd explained that the column slabs
were not planed, a direct violation OF
part 8, section H, paragraph 2" OF the
building code.
Discussing Withdrawing Of the steel
members Of the frame, Mr.. Todd as
serted in his statement that his con-
Germ made a demand that more bracing
be provided between the columns and
trllsses. He said the Todd company
was informed lin substance, by the
representatives Of the National Con-
struction Co., that the bracing pro-
vided for by the plans had been deemed
to be fit and proper by the municipal
architects ONCE: that the Heron Todd
Construction Co. was erector OF the
steel and that it was their duty to fol-
low plans; that upon the refusal OF
the National Construction Co. to listen
to the plea 'of the Heron Todd Con-
struction Co. that more bracing be-
tween the columns and trusses be put
in than was set forth In the plans,
then the Heron Todd Construction Co.,
through its representatives, again de-
manded that the concrete and brick
work be done simultaneously with the
steel erection work, IN order TO furnish
a support for the steel erection work.
Pursuant to this request (Which order
was sanctioned by the representatives
of the municipal architects ofhce) the
company was ordered to go ahead and
do the steel-erection work"
No Wind Bracing in Columns.
There was no wind bracing or struts
In any of the 59-foot unsupported length
of columns that fell, Mr. Todd con-
tinued, despite the fact that ut Is the
universally recognized custom of the
steel business" to provide bracing in
such columns over 80 feet in length.
This lack Of bracing, he asserted, was in
violation of part 8, section /; part 8,
section j, and part 8, section e, para
graphs / and 2" of the District of Co
| lunbia Code.
When the work first was undertaken,
Mr.. Todd has advised the District Build
| ing, it was agreed between the Ma
tional Construction Co., its first super
intendent, and the Todd firm that the
brick work would progress with the
steel erection. Subsequently, however,