Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1888-11-01

AoA iouf montns THIS spring, stopping WORK
seven weeks ago yesterday. He worked first in
Champlain avenue west heading, afterward
at Rock Creek west, then Champlain east
during the first year. He worked on all parts
OF the brick work part Of the lining. On the
invert the brick work was generally good, and
the mortar varied in quality, some of it con-
tanning too much sand. The invert was sup
posed to lay on concrete; generally did SO,
though sometimes the rock came up too high
for this. On the sides the brick work was good.
The packing behind the sides was dumped in
loosely. When the officer came in better work
was done. This kind of work extended about
1000 feet On the arch the brick work was all
right, and
THE PACKING WAS ALL ROTTEN.
The packing was thrown in loosely, and in
many places there was no attempt to fill it at
all. There were three brick-layers and one
packer. 1t was an impossibility for one man
to do the packing. Some mortar was used, but
there were not 20 feet of straight work"
In the entire 1000 feet. He was not sure of
what proportion Of the centers we're sighted,
but he thought that holes could be punched in
the wrong places. Sometimes he was afraid
that the arches would fall of their own weight.
To an inquiry by the court he replied that he
had often heard of arches falling because Of
no packing on their sides to bear them up.
COUNSEL FOB MAJOR LYDEoKER AND CAPTAIN
TOWNSEND.
At this point Capt. Chester, Of the Third Ar
tiliery entered and was introduced to the court
as counsel for Major Lydecker and Lieut.
Townsend.
The examination Of the witness was then re-
sumed. In the work in the Rock Creek head
ing the brick-work was good in the arch, and
the bricks and mortar were good The pack
ing behind the side walls was dry, loose pack
thrown "a in
slze from inches to 2 feet long, no Sc
lection seeming to be made. At GER
tain height a layer of mortar was laid
over all. Sixteen courses were built be-
lore the packing was used. No mortar
was used except to stop the front of the pack
ing when the engineers came around. There
were seventy courses in the whole arch. The
spaces above the arch varied from foot to 8
or feet high. Fully three-quarters of the
Rock Creek heading work was packed badly,
with holes to be found almost anywhere above
the arch.
INSPECTOR o'BRIEN AND THE BRIcK-LAYERs.
In the work on the East Champlain avenue
heading, the witness said, about the same state
Of things prevailed. Inspector O'Brien ordered
the brick-layers to use rough stone mortar on
the arch, and they told him that they would
rather go home than use it, and after consider
ing the matter he decided not to use it. 1t had
stones in it. The packing behind the side walls
was fairly good, some mortar being used. Wit
ness only worked on the keys for four days, in
each of them bad work being done. About 40
feet was done in these four days.
In Champlain avenue west witness worked on
about 500 feet. The side walls were Of stone,
OF which he knew nothing. Bricks and brick
work were good. The side packing on this sec
ton was loose, with layer OF mortar laid on
the top every sixteen courses. The key pack
ing was thrown in loosely here also. Witness
worked all day long on the entire arch. OBrien
was inspector and boss of the work.
Col. Hodges asked the distance from the car
carrying the stones to the bottom of the place
where the packing was to go. Witness replied
that it was about feet In some places the
space was SO small that q man could not
lay the packing except by throwing the stones.
THE WITNESS cRoss-ExAM1NED.
Upon cross-examination by Lieut.. Townsend
witness stated that he had not previously in
formed any officer of the Government about
the bad work. The work done under Lucas
this year was good deal better than that done
under him last year. The latter was all bad
This year he insisted on cement being used in
the packing. Witness had never seen the spec
lhcatlons, but had heard kirlin say that the
work was to be laid in cement. He never re-
ceived any further directions. Mcnamara was
foreman and laid the men OFF and starved them
whenever he stw fit, but did not give any di-
rections. Witness had never seen any direc-
sitting around and seeing the stones being
thrown in loosely. If a man loafed either Nc
Namara or O'Brien laid him off. Witness was
foreman of the gang on piece of work in
Champlain avenue west. This work was pretty
good, but not up to the specifications He
never gave directions of any kind during this
time.
WHAT HE MEANT BY ''BAD PACKING"
Upon redirect examination witness explained
that by bad packing he meant such as was not
self-supporting. If the arch should be taken
out the packing would fall, while if it was laid
in cement it would stand alone. 1t is burden
on the top of the arch as it is. As brick
mason witness received IS day. Last winter
he received $3.50, and while he was foreman
the figure was $3.50. Lucas gave witness infor-
nation as to how the work should be done.
When he went down into the tunnel in Lucas
section the latter told the men that he was 60
ing to hold them right down, and
that they must give good work. He was
IN charge of the packers as well as
did not consider himself responsible for the
character Of the work. He knew that the pack
ing, which was laid in cement, was not exactly
what 1T should have been. When asked why he
ala not complain or enforce good work, witness
replied: What could do? II said anything
would have been discharged. The packers
received Sl.75, while a stonemason, who should
have been employed, would have received "a. so
per DAY. III the packing had been laid by ma
sons instead OF laborers it would have been
better. Masons would have laid the rough
stones solidly and regularly. He had been told
that the specifications called for practical men
Solid work could be done in his opinion If
the packing were all solid the pressure inside
of the arch would not crush the arch or pack
ing.
TESTIMONY OF CIVIL ENGINEER EMPLOYED BY
THE CONTRACTORS.
Frank W. Clark was the next witness exam
ined. He is employed as a civil engineer by
Beckwith & Quackenbush, the contractors.
His duties were to lay out centers and head
ings and to take cross-sections. His instruc-
tions were to take observations whenever he
went through the tunnel to see that the work
was up to the specifications; went into the tun-
mel about four days in week. In passing
through he saw about one-twentieth of the
work, 30 that he could testify as to its char
acter. His principal work was taking cross
sections. From the Howard University shaft
to the Champlain avenue shaft he passed
through about twice week, and thought that
good work was being done. He considered
that the packing was good. He saw
the workmen putting stone in and using NOR
tar. They were not laying the stones as they
would in laying a Sidewalk; but that was not
required. He had never seen any work going
on In the tunnel that was not according to the
specifications. In passing through he did not
stop, and very seldom noticed the work above
! the keying. 1t was not his business to give
orders to the foremen, except as to the trim