932.
Wha carta ext
949
Supposing now, you opened up this 2'4", and then you 1612
found it was perfectly good concrete, dont you think it is a great hardship on the owner if you dug up 3 or
Hemphys
7612
4 holes all over the place.
A.
Two is the most in one place.
7673
Q.
I have known three, in a certain case.
A.
7613
You talk of the hardship to the owners. In such a case, if I opened up and found the material to be absolutely good, I should send to the Secretary to pay it, without
expense to the owner.
That is under the Ordinance ?
7614
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference:-
C.O. 537
he chairman ;-
2614
r Humphreys:
76120
A.
A.
2616 Qu
A.
7617 Q.
and oferidan
A.
<
Shelton Hooper;"
Yes.
Then in other words, there is no other way of testing 7615
the thing, except by digging up a good big square ?
That is so if a man is going to give his honest opinion. Then it is absolutely impossible, even if you have the 766 permission of the Government, or if the Ordinance
allows you to put it back at the expense of the
-
Government it is impossible to make that yard as good
as it was before ?
Certainly, you would never get as perfect a surface, yet still to all intents and purposes, there is no
great hard done.
Or so neat. Either as good or as neat? So that the 7617
test in point of fact has really done harm cases where the concrete has been good ?
A slight degree of harm.
-
in such
When you make a hole, dont you test the thickness of 7618
the concrete ?
1
76.8
A.
Yes.
761920
A
What thickness did you fird ?
I found it the required thickness, but not of good
material.
7624 Q.
You found the material bad ↑
7619
7620
COPYRIGHT
REPRODUCED PHOIC
RECORD OFFICE, LONDON OUT PERMISSION OF THE PUBLIC LY WITH NOT TO BE