Sessional_Paper_1901 — Page 703

( 12 )

LEUNG TUNG re-called :

I had no cockloft as sketched in Exhibit A on the ground floor of No. 32.

CHAN CHEN CHEUNG re-called :—

The cockloft for storing beams and planks on the ground floor of No. 34 was from one party wall to the other. The cockloft was 10 odd feet deep. The small half of this cockloft was filled with timber. The cockloft was there when I bought the house. I did not notice a similar cockloft in the blacksmith's shop. I moved the staircase one or two feet out. The cubicles were put up by the tenants. After the alterations were completed, cubicles were erected on the 2nd and 3rd floors of No. 32, and on the 2nd floor of No. 34. The head of each staircase rests against a beam. The beam went right across the house from party wall to party wall. This beam is larger and stronger than the ordinary beam. The beams on the 1st and 2nd floors had to be moved.

HUGH POLLOCK TOOKER sworn and examined by Mr. BOWLEY :-

I carry out the duties of the Director of Public Works under the Building Ordinance. I have carried out those duties since April, 1890. The work has increased enormously, since that date. From the time I took over the duties up to June, 1900, the staff consisted of an assistant engineer and myself. For a number of years Mr. Hazeland was my assistant and on his resignation Mr. Xavier. Before Mr. Hazeland took over the duties I had Mr. Sample as an assistant, I had the whole of his time for Building Ordinance work. Mr. Hazeland followed Mr. Sample in January. 1892. Both Mr. Hazeland and Mr. Xavier were sometimes called off for other work. Until Mr. Pear- son resigned in June last year he gave the whole of his time to the work. After Pearson resigned there was no overseer. Mr. Xavier handed over the whole of his work to Mr. Crisp. The staff which assisted me was reduced from an assistant engineer and an overseer to an overseer only. The work had increased enormously, practically three times. I have made representation to the Head of my Department repeatedly about the insufficiency of my staff. I have been able to give less and less time to the Building Ordinance work because my other work has considerably increased and my staff has been reduced. I received notice A, plans B and C early in Novem- ber last. The first thing I do is to see if the plans comply with the Building Ordinance. I then pass them to the Medical Officer of Health to see if they comply with the Public Health Ordinance. This was done on the 6th November. He wanted the width verified. I sent Mr. Crisp to verify the width. This was found to be correct and I issued permit D. The permit is returned with the original plan to the architect, and I retained the tracing of the plan. Plan C had to go up to the Governor for approval. The detail plan for the verandah is filed in the office. I also received on the 7th December notice and plan E. I examined the plan myself and passed it to the Medical Officer of Health. Mr. Crisp was sent to measure the street on the 19th December. Permit G was issued by me. I did not inspect either of these houses before the accident. Except Mr. Xavier and Mr. Crisp there was no other officer who could inspect these buildings. No officer did inspect these buildings. There was no examination of any kind whatsoever of these buildings by any officer of the Department either before or after the approval of the plans. Except with the approval of the Director of Public Works the old part of the buildings in which alter- ations are to be raade must comply with the new Building Ordinance. Except with the approval of the Director of Public Works the walls of the lower storey must be of red brick, and except with the approval of the Director of Public Works, no party wall can exceed 35 feet in length except with a "return" or cross wall. On these three points the Director of Public Works has a discretion. With respect to the last point, I have a direction not to enforce that requirement in This order was made in consequence of representations made by certain architects in this Colony. With respect to the solidity of the wall, the bonding of the brick work, the thickness of the walls and the foundations, there is a discretion in the Director of Public Works as regards old buildings -but not as to new buildings. With respect to old buildings the Director of Public Works has a discretion whether he will allow alterations and additions or not. I am acquainted with section 75, but would rather not express an opinion on the section. Plan B only shows the line of the top of the foundations of the old walls. I would take from plans Band E that there were foundations. It is the universal practice of architects not to show foundations of old walls, because it is unreasonable to expect the whole foundation to be opened up. It is the universal practice of the Public Works Department to approve of a plan submitted by an European architect without knowing whether the foundations are good or bad. This has been the practice for the last 12 years. The plans do not show whether the walls are of blue bricks or red bricks. The plans do not show if the bricks are properly bonded or solidly built. A plan could not show that except ou a large scale which the Ordinance does not require. It is desirable before exercising any discretion of approving of alterations and additions to old work to make a personal inspection. It is not possible to inspect foundations without opening them up. It is not possible to see if a wall is pro- perly built without opening it up and cutting into the wall. It is possible for an 18-inch wall to consist of two 9-inch walls without any bonding between them. Plan B shows that the wall is to be raised 50 feet high from the footing to the top. This is the maximum height allowed for this thickness of wall. It is shown in plans B and E that the houses are built fronting a sloping street.

any case.