Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-03-28
Continued From Page A-aS


caused some embarrassment to
this bureau involved the approx
ing of hotel license to an oper-
ator at a time when his estab-
lishments did not meet regula-
tons.
Regulations require Sthis bu-
reau's approval prior to the
granting of a license by the De-
partment of Licenses and InSpec-
tons. The applicant had pre-
viouSly operated boarding house
III the same building. He was
anxious TO secure hotel license
So that in turn he could, also,
DC ain liquor license.
On August ,, 1855, an inspector
OF this bureau examined the
y misses IN connection with the
license application. He refused
approval, due to lack of dish
washing and handWashing ia
cllitleS, lack of working space,
and the presence of rodent bur
rows, etc.
Over this recommendation for
disapproval, approval was given
According to information fur
nished this staff, Mr.. Burdette
ordered approval and he did this
on the basis of a telephone re-
quest from an official in the De-
partment of Licenses and In
SpectionS. The file in this bureau
contains a letter from the APP
pllcant promising correction u
the deficiencies. This was noted
for approval by the assistant
chief OF the interested division
and endorsed by NJ. Burdette
Subsequently the operator
failed to correct the Deficiencies
as promised. He was taken INTO
court and the case became one
which was used by newspaper
to illustrate lax enforcement
Case c, restaurant ".
One of the most glaring exam
Piles of neglect of the public
interest by the bureau is re-
fiected in the above designated
restaurant which is located on
the wharf area in municipality
owned space.
Particular interest in this res
tauranJ on the part of the staff
was occaSioned in the course OF
a personal inspection of the
premises in the company OF
bureau inspector. The staff
member, the bureau inspector
and the owner made an inspec-
ton of the premises and they
were found in deplorable condi-
ton. The accumulation of
grease and filth, and the poor
housekeeping practices indicated
long neglect. In the midst OF
inquiries regarding sanitary
practices the owner became re-
Sentful of the inspection. In
what appeared 10 be an effort to
try TO intimidate the bureau in
Spector, the owner placed call
TO Mr.. Burdette. chief OF the
bureau. However, the chief was
not in his Office at the time.
Personnel of the bureau adj
vised the staff that the owner
was former District employe
who had maintained good con-
nections in the District govern
ment and that for this reason he
was given favored attention by
this bureau.
One employe advised that he
gave this restaurant a score of
50 per cent in about July, l949
that he came back to the Office
TO write out a warrant against
the restaurant due to the filthy
conditions, and that this war
rent was turned down by Mr.
Burdette. Finally this inspec-
tors supervisor told him to stay
out of that restaurant. AS a
result he would continue to in
Spect the other wharf restau-
rants but would not go into res
tauant X.
Still another inspector advised
that he had tried to get war
rant out against the manage
ment OF this restaurant in about
1919 or 1850. that instead of al
loving it, which would have been
the regular procedure due to the
filthy conditions encountered
his supervisor turned down the
request. Still another inspector