Sessional_Paper_1901 — Page 707

No. 1643.

( 16 )

Exhibit G.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,

HONGKONG, 19th December, 1900.

Notice has been duly received from Chan Tsun Cheung of intention to re-build cross wall and to make additions to honse No. 34, Cochrane Street, on Inland Last 1 Section 1 Sub-section 2 in accordance with plan deposited in this Department by Mr. E. M. Hazeland.

The work is to be carried out in accordance with the terms of the Building Ordinance No. 15 of 1889 as amondul by Ordinances 25 of 1891 and 7 of 1895.

I approve of the above plan as being in conformity with the Building Ordinance No. 15 of 1889 as amendeș by Ordinances 25 of 1891 and 7 of 1895 and for no other purpose.

The person on whose behalf this plan is submitted to me must satisfy himself that the building or work de- lineated in the plan will not, if carried out, infringe any of the provisions of the various Ordinances and Bye-laws relating to the Public Health and in Particular that it will not infringe any of the provisions of Ordinance 15 of 1894 or any Bye-law made thereunder.

(Signed)

H. P. TOOKER. pro. Director of Public Works.

Mr. Bowley then proceeded to review the evidence. He said it was quite clear, as he mentioned in re-opening the enquiry, that the deaths of these unfortunate people were caused by the collapse of the houses, and he took it that the object of the enquiry was to find out why the houses collapsed. In his opinion they had had overwhelming evidence from several expert engineers that the real cause was the faulty construction of the party wall between the two houses. That being so, the enquiry really limited itself to the finding out of the cause of the falling of the party wall, and his Worship would doubtless be of the opinion that its fall was brought about to a very great extent, if not altogether, by the addition of an extra storey comprising heavy beams and brick work. There were, perhaps, minor causes, such as the soaking of rain into the building and the vibration caused by the work in the blacksmith's shop. but in spite of these, Mr. Bowley said he would submit that the main cause of the collapse was the addition of the new storey to this old building, which was erected in 1878, and was originally a three-storey house. Built, as houses were in those days, of blue brick, it had somehow or other stood the wear and tear of usage and climate for some twenty-two years. Recently it changed hands, and the purchaser, seeing what was going on everywhere in the Colony, thought he would do the saine as other house-owners and add another storey. Before carrying out his idea, he took professional opinion as to its feasibility, and went to work to find out if the walls were strong enough. The architect, who must have known how old the building was, did not take warning by the many collapses that had previously taken place, and thought it sufficient to send an overseer to look after the matter, with no instructions to make a careful examination of the building, but simply to look at the walls. The overseer went there and spent twenty minutes in each house. He never thought of looking at the founda- tions, or even of scraping away the whitewash from any part of the walls, and did not even plumb them except with his eye. He did not cut into them to ascertain their solidity-he simply looked at them. Then along came the draughtsman to measure the houses. He spent fifteen minutes of his valuable time there, and took three measurements-breadth, depth, and height of each floor. From these three measurements he drew up the elaborate plans that had been produced in Court, each of them absolutely incorrect in several respects. Then the plans were made out, omitting some important information that should have been included. They did not show two old cross walls that had to come down, and no foundations whatever except to the new wall. The height of the wall itself was mere guess-work-in one plan no staircases were shown at all. These plans were thought to be sufficient to send up to the Public Works Department, where they were given a cursory glance to by that very much overworked official, the Excentive Engineer under the Building Ordinance. They then went to the Medical Officer of Health, whose only doubts were as to the height of the walls in respect of the width of the street. Accordingly an overseer was sent to measure the width of the street to satisfy the Medical Officer of Health, and the Director of Public Works, or, rather, Mr. Tooker on his behalf, issued a permit for the alterations and additions proposed. It had been pointed out in the evidence that the Ordinance required amongst other things that all walls shall be built solid, of good bricks properly boudel together, and that the lower storey must be built of red brick and so on, and under the Ordinance the Director of Public Works had absolute discretion in the matter of granting or refusing perinits for additions or alterations to old baiklings, unless the old building complied in every respect with the Building Ordinance. Yet no one in the Public Works Department ever took the trouble to find out whether the requirements of the Ordinance as to such alterations and additions were being fulfilled. From the beginning to the end no one ever thought of going and looking at the foundations, and it appeared as though the foundations had nothing whatever to do with the matter. Nobody even knew whether there were foundations or not until the opening up took place. The elaborate machinery of the Ordinance having been got through in this farcical way, the plans, after the formal approval of the Director of Public Works, were handed to the contractor or architect, and then the work of hacking and cutting this poor old party wall was commenced, till by degrees this death-trap, warranted to hold 55 people, was erected. No one ever inspected the work, from the commencement to the finish. This was a