The morning times., 1896-10-06
KINGS VIEW
Reports That Albert Building
Was Well Constructed.
HIS PERSONAL INSPECTION
Building Inspector Brady and Mr..
John Ii. Hewlett Have Some Words
Over the Formers RepOrt-Mr.
Hewlett RciteratesCharges-
graphs OF the Collapsed Structure.

In addition 10 the report made by Build
ing inspector Brady CONCERNING tie con-
struction of the Albert building, published
yes ,crday in Tie Evening LINES, which is
an issue that is likely TO soon become prom
incnt in the courts, A ssistant Inspector Is.
C. King yesterday made an Official state
ment, w hich was in effect that he had IN
led the building on an average twice
aweek up to Tue time it was under rcof and
that it was constructed in workmannke;
manner throughout.
Il have repor ed it, he said, Ito be
satisfactory, both as to materials and work
manSlp, and found no reason to find fault
with the exception of the floor Joists.
These were Shown on The plans, Mr.. King
says, TO be 3xl4 Virginia pine. placed l6
inches from cenlers This he objected to,
for the reason that upon computation being
made by his office they were found to be
inadequate for the purpose for which they
Were to he used.
by direction of the office they We're
placed twelve inches from centers, and all
weak joists doubled, W hich met the require
ments,'' Mr.. King added.
WAS PROPERLY ANCHORED.
"Thc anchors which were placed In the
transverse iron beams consisted OF three
fourths inch round iron located in the end
of the beam entering the west wall to the
depth Of nine inches. The anchor in the
south beam, al the point where the wind
struck the wall with the greatest force,
was bent into tie shape OF the letter U,
indicating terrific force.
"An materials used in the building are
OF good quality is Mr.. Kings opinion.
Mir. John II Hewlett, who had teen ad-
YiScd Of the contents of Mr.. Brady's re-
port on tue Albert building, was seen yes
tcrday. lie persists in his declaration
originally made, and says an aftCr-inspec-
tion not only confirms his estimate of the
construction, but makes IL worse than even
he thought al first.
He claims the Albert walls were built
over on the Beatty building; that there
is large crack extending from tie rear
of the old house up through the new brick
work, the construction having been COM
meuced on an old wall, that the mortar
used was made OF lime, ins. cad of cement
and sand, and that there was no anchor
worked in the wall from floors or roof.
There is one small hole, he says. in The
end of the girders, instead of three three
quarter inch holes. through which to bolt
the star anchors to girders.
There are no long tie anchors. Mr.. Hewlett
insists, worked into tie middle of the wall
and turned up 1T tile ends to bind the two
and hold the front walls to side walls.
Tie girder in The middle, he says. is Il
SOuECc oi weakness lfls eau OF strength, III
resisting lateral pressure, such as that
eXerted on tie night OF the storm.
BRIEF WAR OF WORDS.
Mcssrs Brady and Hewlett met in the
corridor OF the District building yesterday
wien a rather heated colloquy transpired.
Mr. Hewlett finally demanding to know
If Mr.. Brady was in office 10 defend faulty
construction. With just a S much emphasis
the latter insisted that his only object
was TO defend good work, and that he
was doing 50 i'll the case of the Albert
building.
Mr.. e. L. Beatty called on the ComInis
sioners yesterday and exhibited photo
graphs of the collapsed building from sew
eral points OF view. He asked that most
thorough investiga ton be made at the
coroner's inquiry, and was assured that
this would be done.
IL is understood that among other wit
nesses to testify before the coroner at the
inquest which will begin at l a. IN. today,
are several well-known contractors, as
follows: 7. II. Mclaughlin, John Hendcr-
son, Enrich & Heisley, E. D. Brown,
W. l.. Conley, Architect Getz and Engineer
Steinmctz, the latter from the new post
office building. Albert Gleason, who was
employed in removing the broken debris
from the broken walls, will also be sum-
moned.
The inquiry promisesto be very interesting
as well as important.
MR. ABERT'S REQUEST.
William Stone Albert was also a caller
at the District building. He represented
that he had been Obliged from precaution
to deny all persons permission To enter his
premises He had no desire TO cover up
anything, whatever, but he did not believe
1t was safe To permit everybody to 70 in
and out and he had therefore refused all.
III the Commissioners desired. he said
he would place the building entirely in the
hands OF the police, and let ii remain SO
until the board should see proper to release
it. He had received orders, he added,
from the building inspector to proceed with
the construction on the original lines, and
until receipt OF those Instructions he had
not permitted his workmen to go upon the
premises.