The Sun.
London, England, 1853-09-27 00:00:00

The Coroner requested 'that such a proceeding should
not be I repeated. The jury were assembled there as
judges to inquire into the cause of the death of those
unfortunate people, and they should not act as the par-
tisans of any parties that were interested.
have
e been
s
Cross-examination resumed—Had already said it
would be irrational to needle the wall. Internal shores
in this case w
wgoi worse
no
uttghoha
tnt
hi
et useless.
they
heusel syd.
when
Thought it better to stop any further excavations until
thebe we
underpinningunis,
o had
for
whunldan
o commenced.dr was
did not' know where they would stop. Had no con-
versation on the Wednesday with Thompson respecting
the party wall. Poor Thompson would not believe that
anything was unsafe.
To Mr. Ballantine—Had been about thirty years in
very active practice, and had some of the most onerous
works in the metropolis under his direction. Was re-
sponsible for all the shoring in Victoria-street, West-
minster. In his opinion the shores were of the proper
height. I Considering the nature of the wall, it would
have been hazardous to put them higher. Though the
five long shores were amply sufficient. Do not know,
if he bad done the shoring himself, that he would have
put more than four. The jack shores were thoroughly
secured, and quite enough of them ; although the foot-
ing was seen at two places there vas no undermining.
The wall was not perilled by that exposure. Was
speaking of the state of the • place when he left
at a quarter to four o'clock on Wednesday. It was
understood by Rowe that no excavation should take ,
place until witness again saw the buildings. Was
not deterred by Mews. Lucas from giving any
further orders; " and thoriglir most judi-
cious person. He was a person that might be left
to himself with confidence, being capable of forming a
sound judgment and carrying out witness's views.
Very seldom Sri architect attended a building more than
once a week ; but there being no clerk of the works
witness thought it to be his duty to attend there fre-
quently. On the Wednesday before he left he directed
the ground to be plumbed dewri. Left Shrimplin
plumbing it, and it was perfectly secure. Was informed
that it was an inch out of the perpendicular. Three
inches would have excited alarm.
To a juror—lf he could conscientiously have told Mr.
Thompson the house was in danger, he would have
done so ; but could not conscientiously say so to answer
his own views. Thought that Rowe had acted judi-
ciously in altering the, shores witness had put up when
other shores were erected.
John Livett, 27, Arundel-street, clerk to a coal mer-
chant, examined—Recollected the house, 184, Strand.
Passed frequently during the operations there. Knew
Rowe ; had occasion to see him on the morning of the
accident about landing some bricks, and went up there
about half-past seven o'clock. Saw several men at
work. One man was engaged in cleaning bricks, and
sitting down ; another was engaged with a shovel re-
moving sand into a barrow. The third, he believed,
was working with a pickaxe, near the Strand, close to
the wall. He appeared to be piercing into the sand.
Witness said to a person who was present that the stuff
they were moving was so soft they might bring the
house down. They were lower than the footing of the
wall about two feet. Went to breakfast, and in about
two minutes afterwards heard the house had tumbled
down. The first time he was there that morning Rowe
was not on the ground. Did not make any remark to
to Rowe. Rowe was within ten feet of the men at
work. The sand appeared almost as loose as if it were
on the river side. Made the observation to a man
named Brown, who was sometimes employed on the
works. None of the men at work could hear him, they
were too far from him. Did not observe on the day
before that the excavation was below the footing of the
wall. The excavation below the footing was five or six
feet in width.
To Mr. Bodkin—Was applied to on Saturday to come
there as a witness, by Mr. Macey. His examination
was taken down in writing on Saturday night at his
house by the clerk of Mr. Abraham's solicitor. Went
at half-past six o'clock in the morning, but did not see
Rowe, though he inquired for him. Again went up at
half-past seven o'clock to see Rowe, though he could not
say it was expressly for that purpose. Saw that Rowe
was engaged, Was close to the hoarding, and. stood
there about fivenrinutes. Had said he was passing acci-
dentally and turned in there. His business with Rowe
would have done at any time of the day, and being there
at that particular time was accidental. Had seen Mr.
Abraham, since the occurrence, and since the jury was
sitting, but had no conversation about it with him.
James Browne, coal porter, examined—Was at the
works on the day of the occurrence, and was standing
there with the gentleman who had just gone out. They
were standing on the opposite side of the way. Saw
four men at the foot of the building, underneath the wall.
I One was cleaning bricks, and the other removing rub-
' bish or something from the corner. Did not see any
one digging. Did not see any one using a pick-axe.
Spoke with the last witness about the state of the build-
ing. Walked away about fifty yards, and it fell down.
Caine back to see it.
To a Juror—Did not see the man using the pick-axe.
They were removing brick rubbish. Did not see any
removed that day. Did not see any gravel carted away
that day. Saw it the day before. About a couple of
cartloads.
To Mr. Bodkin—Worked sometimes for Mr. Livett.
They were standing together, and walked away together.
To a Juror—Their meeting was perfetly accidental.
To Mr. Hawkins—Could see the footings of the house.
They were about two feet down from the level of the
house to the new foundation. Could see two feet below
the foundation of the old house, and in length it was
nearly the width of that room (about thirty-five feet).
To a Juror—Saw the footing the day before the
morning of the accident, and no alteration took place as
far as he could observe. Believed there were four
shores, but did not observe anything about the footing
of them.
Mr. Thomas Bayliss, residing at 273, Strand, said
though not summoned he was ready to give evidence,
but had been present during the previous examination.
The Coroner—What are you ? Mr. Bayliss—An iron-
monger.
The Coroner—Are you a surveyor ? Mr. Bayliss—
No, sir, I merely mean to speak common sense—
(laughter)—and what has not been touched on, or at
least slightly touched upon.
Having been sworn, Mr. Bayliss stated that the wall
of the house had been cut away the whole depth of the
house from back to front. It was cut away from one
end to the other nearly. Saw two shores distinctly,
and there might have been three, but was not sure.
The plan produced there, from which it appeared there
were many short shores, was quite incorrect. Could
say more ; but was not to say anything he heard, he
supposed.
To a Juror—Thought their motive was to get the
new wall up to the old one. They cut it with a chisel
and hammer. Could not identify the parties who were
doing it. Would not say he had seen Mr. Abraham
on the premises. He might or might not have been
there.
To Mr. Ballantine—lt was likely he might have said
that he would attend and tender his evidence. Might
have' talked about it to some of his neighbours. Did
not know that he had mentioned it to any one present.
Mr. Ballantine—Give us a "common sense" answer.
(Laughter.)
Cross-examination resumed—Would swear that the
shores on the map were falsely represented.
Counsel—Never having been on the premises, will
you 'say this is a false representation of the number of
shores ? Witness—Yes, of the short shores.
Counsel—Will you say this is a false representation of
the number of shoresl—Witness—l have not seen that
(examined the plan) ;' there were not so many shores as
are marked on that plan.
Counsel—Do you mean to swear that is a false plan ?
Witness—There were not so many shores as are marked
there ; there were two or three. Saw two with his own
eyes distinctly, but would not say whether there were
two or three ' • to the best of his judgment there were
only. three. Would not swear there were four. Would
swear there were not five.
Mr. Ballantine proposed to examine Mr. Abraham as
to the exact number of shores.
A Juror—We have it already in evidence.
Mr. Abraham was re-examined, and stated that the
plan contained an accurate representation of the number
of shores.
To Mr. Hawkins--Thought there were about eleven
or twelve short shores. They are not all shown on the
drawing.
Mr. Hawkins—How many shores were there to sup-
port the party wall and the wall of the parlour I—Wit-
ness—Eight or nine.
The Coroner then read the following report,of the sur-
veyors by whom the premises were examined.
"To Samuel F. Langham, Esq., Deputy-Coroner for the
City and Liberty of Westminster.
" Sir,—Agreeably to the instructions contained in
your letter of the 10th instant, with reference to the
accident arising from the fall of the house, No. 184,
Strand. we, in the first instance, appointed an efficient
person, with assistants, to carefully remove the rubbish
, to a sufficient extent, tq enable us to form a correct
judgment upon the points at issue, and subsequently
attended on various occasions to give them instructions.
The' points referred to being, whether there has been
any want of due care and circumspection in shoring
up the premises, and whether any means might have
I been resorted to which would have the effect of prevent-
ing the falling of the house in question. First, as to
the materials used for shoring, we are of opinion that
they were ample in dimensions, and of the best quality ;
that those which were fixed were of proper construction,
and in all respects fit for the purpose ; but we are further
of opinion that, assuming the evidence of William
Shrimplin to be correct as to the length of the shores,
and their distance from the party wall at the foot, by
which the whole weight of the basement and ground
h
floor was unsustained, that additional shores should
been placed underneath, more especially as the
whole area on the east side had been excavated to a con-
' siderable depth below the kitchen flour of No. 184, and
also was stated in some places to be below the footings