Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-12-06
VERY POOR CEMENT
Said TO Have Been Used in Construct
ing MonoDgahela Dam No. z.
EVIDENCE FOR COMMONWEALTH.
The Testimony in Rebuttal Will be Heard
This Morning.
ARGUMENTS TO BE MADE NExrTUEsDAY

The evidence yesterday in the case of the
condemnation of Dam No. Z, was given for
the Commonwealth and was to show that
the lock is not so valuable as when Just
built. The Commonwealth also tried to
show that it was not well constructed and
that cement used was OF a poor quality.
Evidence in rebuttal was heard and more
will follow to-day.
Engineer Harlow, who had charge of the
construction of lock and dam No z, testified
that the cost of building the lock was about
the same to-day as when it was built. There
were some items, however, on the bill of
costs that the witness thought were too high.
c. J. Mcdonald, the contractor who built
lock and dam No. Z, said the work could be
done to-day for the same money as in 1884.
The witness did not think that age improved
a dam. The witness did not think the
settling ofthe wall affected it to any extent.
Contractor Archibald stated that he made
an examination ot the lock four years ago
and plumbed the wall, and he found that
there was certain bulging and leaning out.
He also found certain cracks of an inch and
two inches, but they did not amount to
much. The witness thought however, that
they would Gepreciate the value of the lock
and dam about % per cent.
SAID TO BE IN BAD CONDITION.
Reese Lindsey, contractor on the stone
work, examined the walls of Lock No.
about three weeks ago and found them in a
very bad condition. In his opinion the ex-
terror masonry work was o. an inferior
character.
J. W. Arras, who is engaged in Govern
ment work under Colonel Merrill, exam
ined the walls of the docks and discovered
cracks and bulging out. The wall was
mostly damaged at the lower end. He did
not think. however, that the wall was
greatly impaired.
Edwin T. Smith testified that he had ex-
amined the lock wall and found it cracked
and showed signs of bad foundation. The
witness impression was that the wall had
insufficient width of foundation. Mr..
Smith said he took some sounding and
found little or no foundation. He also e1-
smined the cement and found it bad, an an
alysis of the cement showed it to be
more of a hydraulic lime than
hydraulic cement The tail wall on the
land side viii have to be rebuilt, and it
would take about s., 500 to make the lock as
good as il was when built. The dam is a
double sloped one built in the old style. The
witness examined the abutment wall on the
other side OF the river and found it in pretty
good shape, but he thought the dam was not
quite long enough, and should have been
about 15 ieet longer. The statement that
any mechanical structure improves with age
was new theory to the witness. His ex-
perience was that it deteriorated and dams
were no exception to the rule. The witness
did not think the dam would cost any more
to-day than it did in 1884
BUFFALO CEMENT CONDEMNED.
William Martin, civil engineer at the
Davis Island dam, stated that he had some
experience with Buffalo cement and found
that II swells. On cross-examination, Mr.
Martin admitted that the cement he used
had been condemned.
At this point the Commonwealth rested,
and Mr. SEiras called Colonel T. P. Roberts
in rebuttal. Colonel Roberts stated that ne
had used Buffalo cement on some bridge
work on the Allegheny river; also
on some work done for the
Pittsburg and Western Railroad and has
known tie cement to be extensively used,
and so far as ne knew it gave perfect salts
faction. The witness also experimental
with the cement and kept it in water for
over a month, but never knew it t o swell.
Colonel Roberts also made an examination
of lock No. and while it was slightly out
of plumb, it does not in any way injure the
wall The witness never heard anything
against Buffalo cement until Colonel Mer-
riIl condemned il. His own experience did
not show il to be a bad cement.
As there is some other rebuttal evidence q
session of court was ordered for this morn
ing when the case will be finished up. By
common consent the arguments will be
made on Tuesday.