Evening star., 1940-04-13
White Court
Plans Rejected
By Engineer
Fire Inquest Told
Of Mysterious
| Approval Later

Plans submitted in 1925 for re-
modelling the building at 2131 o
street NV. were rejected by an en-
gineer in the building inspectors
Office, but were approved mys-
teriously sometime later without
change, 1t was testified today at the
inquest into the deaths of three per-
sons in fire at that address April /.
Hugh Dollins of 749 Princeton
place NV, the engineer, was the
first witness called. He testified that
he was assigned to go over the plans
which were submitted by Snowden
Ashford, former District Of Colum-
bia architect and architect for the
O street apartment.
did you pass these plans?" asked
Coroner A. Magruder Macdonald.
mo"
"Why?"
Noted Need for Changes.
There were good many things
to be changed in the plans. I un-
derstand that Ashford went to some
one else to get them waived
DO you know whom he went to?"
Il understand he wrote letter to
some one. Maj Wheeler, heard"
Who Is Maj. Wheeler?"
He was the engineering officer"
| What was wrong with these
plans that made you reject them?"
Looking at these plans, there is
no indication what the doors were
made of or what the partitions
were-that is, whether they were
f1re-resisting. believe I asked the
architect about those points"
Mr.. Dollins went on to say that
there were other aspects of the plans
that did not satisfy him and that
ne called for more information be-
fore he would consider issuing q
permit.
However, he received no answer
10 his request for information.
Asked by the coroner what Mr..
Ashford's reaction had been to this
request, Mr.. Dollins said:
Since I had been his Junior in
the department when he was build
ing inspector, before he was munich
pal architect, he resented the fact
that had found fault with his plans
and he got angry"
Refused to Grant Permit.
Did he threaten to 60 over your
head?"
That was the normal procedure"
In this case, did you refuse to
grant a permit?"
| That's right"
In the normal course of things.
these plans would have come back
to you when the corrections had
been made, wouldn't they?"
That's right"
But they didn't come back to YOU
at all, and this case was abnormal"
The coroner showed Mr.. Dollins a
picture OF the stairwell in the
wrecked building and asked him if
he would have approved that sort of
inside fire escape. Mr.. Dollins said
that he would not have, and added:
His plans don't show what we
normally require in protection
around stairwells, and in that re-
spect they are deficient"
Two of the fires victims were
found burned to death on the stairs,
it had been testified earlier.
The inquest drew to a close today
after three days of testimony.
Only three witnesses remained to
testify when the inquest was re-
sumed at II am. today. Coroner
A. Magruder Macdonald said he
would give the jury full instructions
on its duty.
These instructions would include
information on the aspects of pos
sible criminal negligence, he said.
He also pointed out that the jury
was free to cite individuals or city
government bureaus which it might
feel were open to criticism.
! d. C. Aides Closely Questioned.
The coroner has summoned
number of workers and officials from
the building and smoke inspectors
offices during the inquest and has
subjected them to stiff questioning.
The questioning brought out that
the building inspectors Office had
failed to carry out its duties in
looking over remodeling work done
on the old building.
| Particular attention was fixed
on circumstances surrounding the
remodellng of a chimney in the
place in 1887. The chimney has
been called defective and listed as
the most likely cause of the fire.
Testimony revealed that remodel
ing OF the chimney was ordered by
the smoke inspector. John N.
Stewart, an assistant inspector, took
the stand yesterday to testify that
he had issued the order, but denied
that he had drawn the plans for
| the work.
He stated also that the smoke in
spector had maintained no contact
with the building inspector in con-
nection with the work and that he
had never made any inquiry to find
out if the work was inspected and
approved.
No Inspector Assigned.
The building inspectors Office Is.
sued permit for the remodelinp,
it was testified by James B. DAILY,
an assistant inspector, without see
ing any plans for the job. Then,
due to slipup, this official failed
to assign an inspector to the Job.
The jury is empowered to hold
for grand jury action any persons
believed to be criminally negligent
and can report to the coroner any
recommendations it may care to
make.