(8)
another brick. Good bricks are sometimes of different sizes. If you buy 1,000 bricks, there are 700 whole bricks and 300 half bricks. The half bricks are good bricks. When I took off the coping I found there were whole bricks and half bricks in the walls. Every joint that I saw of the old wall was covered by a brick. The wall that I built was better than the old wall. When I built the new wall I used the old bricks. The Government (Naval Yard) does that. I have seen them doing it. I do not know why the wall collapsed. I thought it was safe to put the weight on. I would not dare to have done it if it was not safe. I do not know the weight which was being put on this wall. I saw that every part of the wall was safe. I made a careful examination of the lower part. I scraped off the whitewash from the wall to see if it was safe. I scraped off some whitewash from the blacksmith shop. I cut a hole in the blacksmith shop. I removed 3 bricks in length and 4 bricks in height. I wanted to see if the wall was good. I removed the bricks on or about the 22nd or 23rd December. I did not show the hole to Chan Chun Cheung or anybody else. The hole was filled up at the completion of the work. The hole was made near the kitchen door of 32, Cochrane Street, outside the kitchen door, the street side of the kitchen door. It was 2 or 3 feet from the ground and was 7 or 8 feet from the kitchen door. I had to make the hole in order to make the new wall join the old one. The hole was 9 inches deep. When I was building there was no recess cut into the party wall of house No. 34 ground floor. I only made one hole to see if the wall was a good wall or not. I judged the three walls by the hole which I made. In order to insert the cor- belling on the top floor I cut into it and inserted new bricks. Chan Chin Cheung frequently came to see the work. He told me to do it according to the plan and to put in good material. The small house on top of the cook-house was built by me. This small house was 7 feet high. It was built of brick. There was one on each house. Chan Chin Cheung told me to build this house. Chan Chün Cheùng told me not to put in the internal cross walls. He said the cross walls were useless. He also told me to build the arch instead of the cross wall. The arch was on the ground floor of each house. I built a chimney in No. 32 but not in No. 34. The stack was not built in No. 32 nor No. 34. I did not build a latrine on No. 34. The cost of the beams was the same as the brick wall. The cost of the arch would be about the same as building the wall. I did not see any Government Ins- pector come and view the building during the alterations.
ERNEST MANNING HAZELAND Sworn and examined :--
I had nothing to do with No. 30, Cochrane Street. Chau Chun Cheung came and asked me to see if the walls of No. 32 were strong enough to take another storey. I told him I would let him know about it. I sent Mr. Pearson to look at the walls. I told him to see if they were sound. I did not tell him to cut into them and examine them thoroughly. I did not tell him to examine the foundations. Mr. Pearson said that the walls appeared sound and good. I believe I informed Chan Chin Cheung. I cannot remember. Chan Chun Cheung instructed me to prepare plans for an addi- tional storey and to alter the cook-houses. I had the house measured by Mr. Stuart, a draughtsman in my employ. The plans were made by Mr. Stuart under my supervision. Plan B is the original plan of the alterations in No. 32. I sent the plans to the Public Works Department. I subsequently obtained permit and handed it to Chan Chin Cheung. Plan was prepared in my office and was sent by me to the Public Works Department. I sent plan B with a tracing.
I sent plan B with a tracing. After I had handed plan and permit D to the owner I had nothing more to do with that house. As far as I remember, the same course was taken with regard to No. 34. I sent Pearson to examine the wall of No. 34. Stuart made plan and I got that passed in the same way. I did not go to these houses nutil after the collapse. You can tell from the outward appearance if the wall is really bad. It is possible for both the external faces to be perfectly good and yet the wall might be hollow in the middle. It is a prudent course to examine the foundations before putting on an extra weight. I did not calculate the extra weight to be put on these walls. I cannot say offhand what would be the pressure on the lower part of the party wall. Pearson has been an overseer in the building trade for 25 years. He was overseer working under the Building Ordinance in the Public Works Department for 5 or 6 years. He has had no practical training as an engineer or architect. For 7 or 8 years I was carry- ing out the provisions of the Building Ordinance in the Public Works Departinent. Pearson was my overseer in the Public Works Department for 4 or 5 years. I was working under the supervi- sion of Mr. Tooker when he was in the Colony. All that Stuart had to do was to measure up the work. I believe there were two cross walls in each house with a yard between. It is not always the practice in submitting plans to show the old work as well as new. I would pass it when I was in the Public Works Department if the alterations were stnall but not if they were large. These plans do not show the old work. The pulling down of the cross wall would not weaken the party wall if the new cross wall was to be built in nearly the same position. The length of the party wall between the cross wall and front wall is 36 feet 4 inches. Unless the approval of the Director of Public Works is obtained no party wall is to exceed 35 feet. In this case it was approved. In the plan of No. 34 the depth is given at 34 feet 6 inches. There is an error in the dimension of one of them.
This party wall is the extreme height allowed by the Ordinance. If it was half an inch higher it would have to be thicker. In the plan of No. 32 the length of the party wall is taken from the footing which is 6 inches below the floor. The proper way to ascertain the footing is to make a hole in the floor. In the Building Ordinance it is laid down that the old portion is to comply with the Ordinance as well