St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-05-08

day night, when the wall had been removed
To the foundation, he began to be afraid
the building was becoming dangerous, and
so told Architect Orff. The latter said
there was no danger. The witness still had
doubts, but relying on the architect, next
morning started his crew to tearing down
the stone wall. He explained that his fears
were occasloned by the fact that each floor,
as the brick were removed, settled at least
three-fourths of an inch. He first noticed
this on the roof and carried the observation
from floor to floor to the bottom, noticing
the settling at each floor 1t was also his
rule that ito remove the foundation was to
take the legs of the building" He went
ahead, however, ON the foundation wall.
relying on the architect. The foundation
wall was double. and after removing one
wall the men used scantling as a ram to
batter down the other He was positive
there was no danger from the ram, as the
wall was below and clear of the joists, and
there could be no jar. An hour and half
before the accident the ram could no longer
be used to advantage, and the men were at
work with bars when the fall occurred. He
was satisfied the first break occurred in an
upper story, and his belief was the timbers
above had been thrown out of plumb by the
| continued setting.
ARCHITECT ORFF DESCRIBED
in detail the work of extending the build
ing and his instructions to the carpenters
in erecting the false work. He considered
the work all right. and believed the floors
should have held the weight Of brick placed
upon them. The piling of the roof brick
was all wrong, he said, and had never been
intended. His opinion Of the causes which
lnd 10 fhaf on ~ h. l~,,;l1l
the plling OF brick on the roof; and, sec
ond, the manner of taking down the wall.
| The weight of brick caused an undue lever
age, and the battering of the wall produced
vibration which loosened tlmbers above.
He had supposed however, that the batter
ing ram had been used to knock away the
wall from beneath the joists, whereas Mr..
Larkln had testified that the rock had been
cleared from the jeists before the ram had
been used. He denied that Larkin had
ever broached the subject of danger, the
| only conversation they had being in refer-
ence to the method of removing the stone
wall.
w. j. Larkin was recalled to say the
major portion of the brick was placed Oh
the side OF the permanent structure, On
each floor, and on the roof inside of the
temporary girder. This was done by MI.
bTack6Ct S instructions.
August Seeber, Larkin's foreman, cor
roborated Larkin's testimony, circumstan-
TALLY, excepting that he mentioned the set
Ting to Larkin, and neither Of them
thought it meant anything.
BUILDING INSPECTOR PARDEE
repeated the statements already made in
relation to the application for building
permit. He had refused MI. Ortf permit
to remove the fire wall and substitute
girders and columns, as being against the
ordinance. 1t was wrong and would have
established dangerous precedent. A week
elapsed and Mr.. Cove came to his Office for
permit on the same conditions A second
refusal was made. and shortly after Messrs.
Cove and Orff returned and renewed the
request. Considerable conversation fol-
lowed and witness said he would refuse a
permit, the ordinance being in doubt and
let the applicants petition the city council.
The witness insisted in refusing, adding
there was an element of danger in rsmov-
ing the wall and advising arches instead Of
clear floor space. Time elapsed and Assist
ant Inspector Hazen reported the wall was
being taken down. Witness determined to
have it settled. not having seen Bracket or
heard OF petition to council, and three
| OF four days before the accident sought an
Interview with Bracket. The latter said
he Qsaw no other course than to go
ahead, and il he wanted to stop the work
he might serve an Injunction. A CONVERSE
ton ensued in which Mr.. Bracket taxed
Pardee with rushing to the newspapers,
and Pardee taxed Bracket with removing a
fire wall, and in a way which contained an
element of danger. Mr.. Pardee said he
had not the slightest idea the foundation
would hQ {bo
building could have stood had the founda-
ton remained. Asked his opinion of the
cause, he drew an elaborate diagram of
the building, with the wall re-
moved and the foundation remain
ing, showing the posts and girders. He
found fault with the method of snoring the
cellar posts. but laid the whole trouble
upon the removal of the foundation wall.
That wall should never have been touched
under any circumstances. The danger lay
there, but may have been increased by the
battering process.
This closed the testimony for the day and
the inquest was adjourned until this morn
ing.
BURIAL OF THE VICTIMS.
A dispatch was received yesterday from
the mother of William Mason, one Of the
killed, at West Jefferson, Ohio directing
the body of her son to be shipped there for
burial, and with instructions to draw on
her for all expenses. The body was sent,
but Mr.. Bracket paid the expenses. It
seems that Mason had wandered away
from good home. and being cut Of work,
went to the Friendly inn, where he worked
about until he was given employment a t
the work at Which he met his death. Re-
Gently he wrote letter to his mother,
which, being misdirected, was returned.
He had tree claim in Dakota and wanted
enough money 70 go there.
The body Of Hans Peterson has been
taken in charge by his friends at the board
ing house on South Mgath street, whence
the funeral will take place to-marrew
John Janisch will be buried this morning
from the German Catholic church on the
East side, the interment to take place in
the East Side Catholic cemetery. His
father, brother and sister have arrived from
Howard Lake. James Connon will be
buried this morning from the Church of the
1A