New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-16

forward 10 testify as TO the facts tnnnccen n,mg
administration Of my Office. For the loresoins
reasons / respectfully urge my right to BE- present.
with my counsel at your sessions ana 10 ef ,"nd
cXamnine the witnesses whose testimony May ""'
10 affect ,,.
especially desire to examine tlooe cc apS
who were adduced before the Deputy Coroner anu nu
whose testimony has doubtless left It's impression o
hs minds min of ne pres so5S IN m nC o % TO testify
with respect 10 the alleged terrorism eAlsuhe ,'I
during my ircinbency Iert are Other , i1' Scr
to have corrected in the same way. or courS'
further wish To produce such testimony ~ your pro
cecdings may render necessary and proper.
have no purpose OF embarrassing III any way your
inquiry or Of having my c"nTo GondMr r ns
| Of the whole 10 the iurN: lut m'sl ni,is'
ten Of adverse witnesses and tho Introduction OF my
| Witnesses will he Of any value to me.
THE REQUEST DENIED.
Coroner Patterson declined 10 accede to THIS re-
oucs, and the inquiry proceeded
Edward Clark the architect Of the Capitol told Of
the alterations to the theatre building which he MADE
| in 1869 The building then perfectly SAFE IN
! 1888 he made examination OF the STRUCTURE anu
| thought II safe. The wall hulGed little and
| caused some apprehension among the clerks but ne
did no, consider that there was danger from this
! cause
| Mr. Thomas asked the witness whether. II four OF
tbo ners had 10 bc underpnnrd four five feet be-
low the original depth. II could be safely done Win
out Snoring.
from above he would not have undertaken to do the
| work without snoring At the suggestion Of Mr.
Uanvcv Mr. Clark promised TO inspect the theatre
binding before continuing his testimony
Thomas B. Entwisle, inspector of buildings OF the
| District said he was called upon about hNe years ago
10 20 over the building and give his opnioh as 10 us
| safety Al that time II was occupied by the medical
| museum The result Of that examination was 'hh'
| no fouud the floors and walls perfectly safe since
! that tine ne had mnde no examination OF H. lie
was asked If the work in progress at the buoihe WIZ"
II collapsed could have done safely without shcr'
ing. and he replied emphacay. N sir
| Would Won have undertaken the woik Without
| shorincl, asked the District Attorney
NO. sir and In my opinion that was the cause OF
| the disaster" t.,
| In his opinion as an expert. the witness S'n
the accident was caused by interference with the oas
| OF one OF the piers without snoring. ME- hh'"'s,e
| was also requested by the jury to inspect the
theatre building determine the cause OF the accoe
| and TO see how the work Was done.
THE ENGINEERS TESTIMONY.
| Francis sasse, the engineer Of the old theatre
| building said he had held that ONCE since Mar,'
"a 1889 He made the specification for the electric
| uyh, plont lie was mechanical steam engineer
| lie had built an archway and seven room d"elihe'
| but had no other experience in bulhihe' NO DIV
had told him how 10 draw the plans ana specihca'""s
He vas not an architect but ha1 erauuauu rum
a technical school where architecture vas :"
cour.e NJ studics The theatre building was ho'
uoh,od ,reu and II was decided by Colonel Aims
worth ~ mt I'm an electric light plant so he DIRE"
nm the plans and specifications Last fan ana gave
them to Colonel Ainsworih. Colonel AinSWof'h III
not know he had drawn them untl theN "e'c SUI
mitted 10 him. He had drawn them up III ofue'
70 ave time in explaining the character Of the wori
to the contractor who might bill some Oh 'i'e o'''
submitted wer, As low $500 but AFTER c"re'u
,nouirv II was decided that Mr.. Dan TO wnom wa
awarded the contract, was the lowest I'sPon ,
bidder His bid something more th"h S'''
Colonel Ainsworth Iisitet IA" bnilhihe hp"'N w
day. sometimes in company With captain Ihorp'' y
! Gov as no knew there was superintendent "
the work - s.
The witness looked at the excavation every u'N
lint saw no signs Of snoring. The specihcanoh'
seemed TO be all right. The contractors e'iuo""S
f thought So and Colonel Ainsworth was pleased
When GROSSLY AHMED the witness said that he con
| sdered himself competent as mechanical engineer "
draw plans, but did not consider Amsei co"'pe'e"
10 say how the work should b. done
Juror Harvey showed some Impotence Win 'h'
4, witness at this point. e. Do you mean 10 say ~
asked, that you considered yourself conpc''n'
draw the plans for this work. when you did not hho"
how it should be done "
You never knew how II was done = =,
Il considered that the expert who would De IL
charge OF the work would know that .
Did you any undermiihgf
| Never -.
:" How did Won know the work would be safe =
THE expert 10 determine that
Pressed TO tell the names OF som" OF me contra
tors who told him the work was safe the VitnesS SAL.
| ne could not remember any Of them, because llcl
had plans last fall, at the uhe "heh ne sd"
'' The witness said that he told clerk after III
accden, that the work had @ %as n
TO direct question from Mr. Thomas; L tahoe da no
howeyeT hat he oresa Wo an" nave com
merely believed tlht the "Oih "ouiu nav W" WI"
pleted In that tme'
THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE WORK.
James H. Dony, the compositor who set up tn
original text Of the specifications Tor the e'c'ii
lighting plant was called to identify the handwriiin
In which the specifications were written lie sal
he thought half OF them were typewriter ana IN
,es, I'm Colonel Ainsworth'> handwriting lie prom
ised 10 inspect original copy. and the jury 'her
% took a recess until O'Clock.
Mr. Dony continued his testimony at the afternoo
session. lie stated that he could not ind The orieina
. copy Of the specifications. 1t has probably bee
thrown into the waste basket 1t was not customary
no aid 70 destroy copy in the War Department print
ing Office. q,
C. W. Perkins, builder. said he had been In Ia
theatre building several times since the accident an
II WIS his opinion that the brick work, 80 nearly
he conld fudge was good but he would have shoie
the piers There was indications OF Snoring II
believed the building was III goOh cohuiuoh Deio'o "
. | undermining was done -
A bricklayer Of forty years experience Da'iu
Cdssel who had erected many large buildings
Washington testified that he had gone Into ihe o.
theatre building two days previous 10 uhe ao'iu, ,i
r | with a view 10 making an estimate on doihe W
bnck work The excavation was going on a; ~ =. I.
p Gim@ lie noticed a man underpnning wall bu
J. saw no evidence Of snoring although he did mol loo
= | for It. Since the collapse he made an eAahnn,
. skilfnl manner In which the work was done caus
!. The accident The work. lie said. was about w
| rors, he ever saw He examined the charac''
. " the cement used and In his opinion 1t was yer
= | moor lie believed the work should not nave Vee
| Isspl
wonld have been danger to the clerks II the "o'
0 | had been done properly. .,a. - f,mm,,
r. Thomas with thirty years experience He had 1ea
r. - bidder for the work Of putting In the electro nsa
m,ant his hid being about 81 800, OF which sWo Wa
~ inr storing The work. he Thought, could no
% hnv. BEEN done safely without snoring Inc WIZ :,