The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-01-23

met yesterday ct the appointed hour In the euprem
Court chamber Coroner Geer then proceeded to I'D.
dress the jury on the evidence elected during the
investigation.
THE CHARGE. II.
Gsntlemen Of the Jury:-A large number of wit
nesses have been examined many Of whom were cho
sen because they were practical master mssons and
selves knew were competent to judge Of the character
OF the work done on the buildings Ter
ana now propose 70 review the testimony Of these
testified before you in such the facts ell
cited may justify. The several master masons and
very generally united in the opinion that the work
on the foundations Of the buildings under consdera
ton, WAS DOT done In substantial and workmanlike .
manner The objections raised against them are the
badness Of the stone Of which they we're com oosed;
the inferior quality OF the mortar used cement them
togetner and their general want of width rendered
the foundation too weak to bear weight OF the su
perstructure above One OF the Witnesses (Robert
Newton) in his testimony states that hs made Known
to Mr.. Flemmipg, the foreman the condition OF the
walls few moments before they fell; and that Mr.
Fiemning informed him the stone wall was built on
heap oil mud and was e;tling down and that mmedi.
stey after he talked with OF his about braciup
that portion Of he walls which out of plumb This
er. biicklsyer, who WAS called about tha time as
stated by Newton, from his work and asked by Fem-
ming the sreman to look at the east gable end wall
which he did and found II ten inches out OF plumb
lie was then ordered by FlemminE to get braces and
brace the walls and that while he gone procure
them the walls fell This portion OF the testmopy il
important, Is 1t implies that person In charge of
the buildings knew Of the dangerous condition Of the
walls even up to the period of few moments before
they fell IL would seem strange that the condition
these walls was not known by persons in charge of
the buildings, when we have the testimony of James
ther witness who testify that they were in the dav
habit OF passing the buildings in Twenty first street
and had observed from two to three weeks before they
fel that the walls out of plumb and that they
saw them gradually bulgng until the 18th of auuary
While on this portion Of the testimony, should be
doing grss I'M ustice humanity were not to remark
Otn11t nj umedl OF q
had mentioned this result of observation fears to
some one In charge, they might at least be comorted
We come now to the brick walls 1t will be- rsmem-
bered tha. of the witnesses this portion of the
testimony, stated that the base bricks was
laid on the side OF the foundati instead of be.
ing laid on their centres, and t. at this q very
unusual mode OF commencing the ioundation of brick
walls. few Of the witnesses have declared the
mortar used on the brick work the walls was
poor in quality as was that used in the foundation
while others have stated their opinion the
here was little better than that used below 1t ap
pears also from testimony that the gable end rear aud
party walls carried TO the height of the fourth
story before they fell in and 1t has been very gene
rally conceded that IL the fronts had been put in be-
fore the walls permitted to reach the height as
stated the buildings would not have fallen. Many of
you, gentlemen, are practical men and best kaow II
II usual Tor houses or this cass to be built In the
way as described. The question has been very gene
rally asked during thsr in estigaton Of tn.
masons and builders VINO have testified before YOU
what would have been the effect II the buildings in
question had gone on to entire completion (and the
they at any future time have been Ia danger OF fall
iSg, several replied they would have fallen while
others thought they would stand Those witnesses
who have given opinions as to the strength and
quality Of the timber used for the tiers
floors, have very generally condemned them as
unsuted in every way for the purposes in
tended; while these persons examined who we're
employ ed to work the several tiers believed they
Of good material, and strong enough for every
practical purpose The two mortar makers testimony
vert TO sbow that the mortar mixed by them for the
bIicklayers employed on the walls, was one load and
lalyg saaAa a 4.
Of loan. Their testimony alike as TO the quantity
Of ssnd. lime aud loan. The testimony OF two
Mmueh the first declared he bsd used worse
and better mortar on buildings in EeS York.
While the second CONDEMNED Z. as bad, and
heard the workmen about him make remarks similar
In mesnipg In the testimony of Mr. Emmst he states
that upon the death OF Mr. Pell, he made an agree
mept with Mr. Spencer to build the six houses in
question and that he was to advance ON time 20
time the Of $4,000 each house, to Mr. Spencer
they pr rogresssd and that contract was draw up
to that effect After this be taken III with rheu.
matism, and, during his sickness he sent for MIR
Thomas who was the architect ployed to superin-
tend and make the drawings on the buildings In
Twenty. first street Mr. Emmet informed Mr. Tno mas
how he pected with the buildings and required
Mr. Thomas give very particular attention to the
enatpg o. them, which Mr. Thomas % do
lie also informed Mr. Tbemss that he should require
cer t6catss frsxn nim payments made for
done aud let him knoS II things did 20 on 70 his
(Mr Thomass entire satisfaciion Mr. Thoms. said
be would attend 10 it, Mr. Emmet occasionally
paid bills on Mr. spepcers orders ana also paid bills
was not to have any supsrntendrnce or power as to
the manner there buildings were TO be- erected-h
having only the control OF the payments Of moneys
~ they due. This portion OF Mr. Emmett. testi.
mony would seem to exonerate Mr. Gl.ntworth from
all blame. The day preceding th. accident Mr Deven
poIt called on Mr., Emmett ana informed him that the
bes which being put to the houses in r~.nty-
rst street were too lght ana the parlor partitions
were not Of brick bat OF studs and he informed Mr.
Davenport he would see to IT, He informed MIR Client
woi tn OF what Mr, Davenport had informed him, aud
be desired Mr.. olsntworth 10 go to MIR. Thomas the
architect, and ret from him certihcats In relation
70 them. Dir. Glentworth, the mkt morning, gave
him n note or certificate. The following day after
The accident In Twenty iirtt street, he Mr Tho
mas, with others st bis Office. aud asked Hr. Tho.
mas how b. could give him such eertihsate as he
had In the face of the accident which had occurred
lie read the csrt6cats In the presence of Mr.. Thomas.
and he did at the time attempt deny the c.rtid.
ate and accounted the ali OF the ouilJipgs by
reason that the workmen had neglected 10 do what he
have been testified to by Mr.. Emmet. Mr. Emmst's
testimony closes By saying he had every confidence In
we're concerned. and thought all wa, right, until
Mr. Davenport informed him Of the facts ststei.
Mr.. 6lent~orths testimony goes u chow that b.
wrote the letter c.riiost. signed VIM Thomas aud
sie led tn. and that u done at the request
and oictstlon OF Mr.. Thomas; Mr. Emmet requested
him to obtain oertincste from mr.. Thornas because
Of ONE Information he had received concerning ths
quality Of I he lumber which being put into the
buileing iB Twenty fret street hs ,ougot Mr.. Thomas
the folloving day. ana found him opposite St Psus
Church, they went together 70 Mr. dleutsorth's of.
Gee ssd. while there Mr Glentwor,h a.ked Mr.
homss to sit do~n and write thst csrtiaest-' NJ.
rhems, Piled "Ytu write " better you wreit,
be explained TO Mr Thomas the object for which the
certificate required TO ssiy the other parties tue
materials were gccd; the object Mr Thom.. had in
not signing said certificate was 60 keep uniformity
on the face of tue letter and TO show " cot sot
up tor the occasion, The next morning he met Mr.
Thomas the corner oi Wall and Broad strssts ant
they vent together TO Mr. Emmet's once Mr. bm-
met asked Mr. Thoma. how he could give acer.iGease
Of that kiI a aud Mr. Thomas thea went ani gave
bis reason ttatsd In the testimony of Mr. Enmst,
TO the oi the TALL Mr Client sorth closed his
feftimcry by saying in the sale of the property iu
Tw.hty. .trst street, he wr 70 have bis cCmmissiCns
and nothing 10 stems unnecessary ~ r,vi@w
the tettimony IL this care further We hste egi-
bodied n-srlv tvyry fact Of importance Which was -
duesd upon the inquest aud it remains tor 70 read
y lev words upon the Law which applies 20 the cese
upon which yeu afeto decide (rhe Coroner here rrAl
from the 20 v lume of the revised statute page 1877
Mr. Thomar according 20 the testimony q Hr. Ven.
met and a section embodied " the contraN betHrtu
Mr. Emmet ana Mr. Spencer. atprars 20 p ~ person
upt rinteLduW the entire work thoae build TO
whom Mr. Imnet gave the entire charga. Hr span-
Ger in the contract has agreed pith Nr Eumrt -
fufni.h eood workmsutbip aud matstilf or hs tuild
ing. In question You are 10 consider, from The tss
mCny before you VI SIR Spencsr ,hss Kept hir