H.—7

142

—It was not, but only up to a certain height. Speaking from memory it was six or seven courses. 2824. You have been out at Seacliff ?—Yes. 2825. Did you notice a little place here [indicating on plan], in the centre wing, near the greenhouse, where some plaster has come off ?—I did not notice it, and my attention was not called to it. 2826. Why were not the joints raketl out ?—I havo already answered that. 2827. Have you sounded the walls—the exterior plaster—at all when you were at Seacliff lately ?—No. 2828. Do you think that the brickwork was sufficiently rough to warrant the joints not being raked out ? — Well, I think so for the ordinary run of work there. 2829. The specifications provide that all exterior walls should be battened on their insides ?— Yes; but it was not done. 2830. And lathed?— That was not done. 2831. Why?—l hardly remember now. There was a certain portion of it done. 2832. Mr. Laivson : It was knocked off. Ido not know why, but I remember now that there was a little done in the upper portion of the central block, where there is a 14in. wall. That is here on the top storey of the kitchen portion [indicating on plan]. 2833. Mr. Mountfort.} We find it in the specification, and one naturally wants to know why it was not done ; and, if it was not done, whether it was allowed for ? —That is stone-work, and the specifications provide that stones shall be laid. 2834. On its natural bed?— Yes; I know it does. 2835. Most probably these were laid in their natural bed all through?— Most of the long stones were. 2836. Were these laid in the natural bed ? —ln some cases they may have been, and in some cases not. All the stones were prepared at the bottom of the tramway —in the station-yard—for a great part of the time. The railway-station is about half a mile away. Part were sawn at the top of the tramway, but the greater portion was wrought by hand at the railway-station. 2837. Seeing that a great amount of brickwork is shown between here and here [indicating on plan], and is shown in long stone, do you not think it had a tendency to bring undue pressure on to these long stones ? —I should say briefly that I do. The dressings werej^onded in with the other work there in order to carry off or distribute the weight. That is one of the things I was objecting to, and that Dick wanted to put in angle shape. 2838. This is the main front of the centre of the building which you reported about on a certain date. Are you certain that the crack was seen there then? —Yes. 2839. Did you form any opinion as to why that crack appeared ?—I did not. You are now putting to me a question that more particularly concerns experts. 2840. We have been put off from time to time, and told to put off these questions till you came, when you could answer them. Now you are here, and we naturally want to get it out of you. You have stated in your evidence that you always thought that the turrets on this wall were dangerously overhanging? —Most decidedly. That was why there was some question about bringing them in. There was another detail which I got from Mr. Lawson —it was on a piece of tracingpaper, but I do not know where it is now. 2841. In that wall which connects these two portions there is a very large arch. It is about 25ft. wide, is it not ?—The span is 23ft., I think. 2842. Do you not think that some of this movement was owing to the pressure of that arch outwards, and increased the overhanging weight there ?—Yes. I may tell you as a fact that the whole of that gable is hollow. There was a great thrust there before this gable was on. 2543. In estimating the weight of this wall, how much did you take out for this hollow ?—We took as much weight out of the gable as we could. 2844. There is a set-off shown on your drawing ?—That is the thickness of the wall from here to there [indicating on plan]. 2845. You spoke just now about some doubtful foundation work hereabouts [indicating on plan]. Do you think that the foundations had anything to do with the settlement up there ?—lt might possibly have something to do with it. There is a fearful overhanging weight there, where the stone turret is. You will see in the specifications that iron bonds are to be used where required, but it is very ambiguously described, and a question arose about it at the time. Mr. Dick wished ' to corbel out with small stones. There is a letter from Mr. Ussher which bears me out in that. After a great deal of bother I got the stones cut out of large blocks, tailed in the walls, and tied down with iron rails. This big detail will show it better. These stones were tailed in without interfering with the work inside. 2846. Was this all one bluestone here [indicating on plan] in one stone ? —lt was too big for one stone ; there were too pieces joined together and tailed into the wall. 2847. If it was owing to your explanation, as wo may call it, that these turrets were drawn in, you would get a better bearing, would you not ?—Yes. That was suggested at the time, when the detail come up. It blocked up this window [indicating on plan], and therefore it had to be carried out as shown on the drawing, the detail for which was prepared by me, and approved by Mr. Lawson. 2848. We will go back to your plan. In the north wing we are aware that, from the nature of things as we found them, a large part of the water which came down these down-pipes was bound to run under the floor of this northern building? —No. There was a stone trap there—l mean a stone block with a trap in it. 2849. It was arranged that this stone trap, which is higher than the air-grating, was put in; while that trap cannot carry off more than a quarter of the water which comes down the pipe ?—I do not remember that, but if it has been done it was an oversight.