H.—7

118

2105. Having been revived, and as the isolating-drain is carried out very much in the way you originally proposed ?—Which isolating-drain ? There are two drains shown here on this plan, but none of them are carried out in the way I proposed. 2106. You said this first one is carried out ?—I mean that it goes towards or somewhat in the direction of. 2107. If that had been carried along the building, do you think it would have stopped the slip? —I do not. 2108. If your drain had been put in, do you think it would have stopped the slip ?—I do, firmly. 2109. Do you think the other drains are doing any good?—No ; I think they are doing harm. 2110. How ?—Because they attract the water to the building through being too close in to it. 2111. Do you not think they lead the water away? Where does the water come from ?—■ From the whole strata above and behind. In the first instance they draw it to the building. 2112. To the building—up hill?— They draw it to the building from the drains being too close. 2113. Does this water cross to the building in such a way as to do injury to the foundations ? —Very likely it does. 2114. Do you submit that as a professional opinion ? —I say bringing the water so close to the building is apt to slop the ground. The water will come in at one side and flow across that drain and rise. 2115. Do you say that the water will be attracted by that drain, and will cross the drain and rise 20ft. up to the building ?—I never did believe anything about it. 2116. Then will you explain your previous answer ?—I say that by placing the drain so close to the building the land is still influenced by the wet. You attract all the water to that one point, and therefore there is a danger of that softening the ground and causing a fracture at that point. 2117. Have you ever seen such a thing ? —I have seen it often. 2118. Do you tell us now, really and candidly, that the water really crossed the drain ? You say that the water is attracted to that drain ?—I say that the water is attracted to that drain, and so influences the foundations, which are 17ft. above it. I say it should not have been placed so close to the building at all. The Chairman: I think we have had enough on that subject. Witness : Yes. Well, of course it is only a matter of opinion. 2119. Mr. Blair.] Are you aware that there is any settlement?—No, there has none been proved. 2120. Will you swear that that building has not settled down in any place in the foundations ? —No; to my knowledge there is no subsidence in the foundations of that building. I take the opinion from my experience. 2121. You rely on your experience ?—Yes. 2122. Why do you take it on one point and not on another? You do not know of your own knowledge that the building has subsided ?—No, I am not aware of my own knowledge whether there is settlement in the foundations. 2123. Can you swear that it has not settled? —To the best of my belief it has not. 2124. Did you take levels yourself?—No, Mr. Brindley did so. I believe I was with him at the time. 2125. Did you do it yourself?—l cannot swear that. We were together. I believe Mr. Brindley did so. Mr. Brindley will be able to say that. 2126. You consider, according to this printed memorandum of yours, that it was necessary to carry this isolating-drain all round the building ?—Yes. 2127. Did you think so in December, 1887 ?—Yes. 2128. How do you reconcile the fact in this private letter of yours to me ?—I thought you understood I was referring to my report. 2129. You state in the introduction to your published letters of the 3rd December, 1887 : " At every available opportunity since I have called attention to this matter, and although a partial stoppage of the movement was caused for over twelve months by a small portion of drainage-works being carried out, I still urged that the whole work was necessary for the security of the building, and having previously proved the complete success of similar protective works at the temporary asylum on similar ground adjoining, I have the utmost confidence that nothing else will save the portion of the permanent building affected from further disaster." Does that imply carrying out the whole scheme of the isolating-drain ? —Yes. 2130. Does it say the whole or portion of the building was to be secured ? You do not say nothing else will save the building. You were not talking of the whole scheme that was necessary, but the whole scheme as originally proposed by you?—As far as I know of it. You must remember the whole of it was under heavy bush at the time. 2131. It was under heavy bush in 1887 as well. Do I understand from you that you attribute the whole damage to the movement of the north wing?— Yes. 2132. Do you believe that the north wing has moved forward 16in. ?—I believe according to the measurement of your experts and from their statements. 2133. Do you believe the wing has moved 16in. ?—I do. 2134. Do you think it was possible for a building 150 ft. long to go 16in. without showing big cracks ? —I do. 2135. Will you cite a case of a building moving forward 16in. ?—I cannot tell you. I know buildings have been reported on. 2136. Can you cite any similar case in any part of the world ?—No, I cannot. 2137. Is there no record of it in any engineering works?—l do not know—l have not studied the matter. I have not access to engineering works, but I quite believe it possible.