The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-06-29
ARE TRYING TO SHIFT IT
Fixing the Responsibility for the
Hennessy Building Accident.
EVIDENCE IN THE CASE
Both the Bricklayers and the Iron
Workers Insist That the Others
Are to Blame for the Death
OF the Men.

The inquest into the Hennessy build
ing accident OF last Saturday was re-
sumed last evening and a number OF
witnesses examined, after whlch an
other adjournment was taken to secure
the attendance of witnesses who were
unable to be present. The taking of
the testimony savored a good deal OF
controversy between the bricklayers and
ironworkers, the former accusing the
latter of being responsible for the acct
dent and the latter defending them
selves against the charges, during
which several colloquies ensued, which
at times became quite personal.
Attorney John n. Kirk. representing
the Fidelity company. which insures
Gillette Herzog against damage suits
which may be brought by employees in
jured in accidents, or the heirs of those
killed. was present, and piled the wit
nesses with questions touching upon
the responsibility for the accident. II.
A. Fitch, local representative of the Gill
lette-Herzog company, vas in attend
ance for the and Foreman
Whiteside of the brickworkers took a
hand at the examination of witnesses.
Bernard Herman. foreman of the IRON
workers, was recalled when the inquest
was resumed. His testimony was the
same as published in yesterdays stand
ard, the only thing new elected from
him being a statement as to the weight
the ironworkers put on the scaffold that
fell, which, he said, was not over 200
pounds in addition to the weight of the
six men.
James Leck, superintendent of con-
struction for Mr.. Hennessy, testified
that the bricklayers built the scaffold.
Pieces Of SKIS were extended from an i
beam running parallel with the wall to
the wall, and resting over a timber
placed on top of the wall. These SKIS
timbers were five or six feet apart, with
cross timbers on top AMI a plank laid on
top Of them.
Can you tell from your experience
whether the scaffold was overloaded"
asked the o
IF it had not been it would not have
fallen" replied Mr.. Leck. Il think the
scaffold was probably strong enough for
all the brickmasons woul have put on
it,"
Juror ]. p. Collins remarked: 1--WE
are satisfied the scaffold was strong
enough for what it was built for. What
we want to determine is whether there
vas any Nilillllldl htSllStItt Vi NdIG-
lessness on the part of whoever was re-
sponsible for its falling. / will ask you
if the timber on the wall extended over
the Window"
~ could not say. If it did, the plat
form was certainly strong enough"
w. G.. Whitesides, foreman of the
bricklayers, testified that he put up the
scaffold and he regarded 1t as perfectly
safe for the purpose for which it was in
tended.
after dinner on the day of the acct
dent" he said, "the ironmen COM
menced erecting a column. 1t was
placed with one end on the staging
which extends along the north wall, on
which the b~rickmasons were at work,
and the other end on the staging along
the Main street side, which at the time
was not being used by the brick crew.
The center of the column rested on one
of the l iron beams. so that the column
just o balanced. / asked Foreman
Herman II he was going to raise the
column from the staging and he said
he was. 1 told him it would not hold it
and he said it would hold more than
twice as much weight as he would put
on il. He went ahead and told his men
to bring on the gin pole to erect the
column. They did so. walking along on
the scaffold. One of the men stepped
on the end of the column. which had the
effect of bringing down half the weight
Of the column on the staging. This, /
suppose. added to the weight of the
men. was too much for the staging and
it went down. / previously moved three
Of my men who were laying brick there
to another place, as l was afraid. My
brother warned the iron outfit Friday
and / warned them again Saturday."
Asked by Juror Collins relative TO the
timber on the wall extending out over
the window. the witness said the wall
was not built up to the window at that
time, but the end of the supporting
timbers at that time rested on an up
right timber, making it perfectly Sc
cure.
Juror Collins asked: Would you
consider the staging sufficiently SUBJ
stantial for ordinary building opera
tions?"
w are still using a staging quilt
the same as that was"
Mr.. Herman requested permission TO
ask a question and a spirited colloquy
followed.
When you spoke Of the staging,
which one did you mean?"
Il meant the n my men were work.
ing on, of course" replied the witness.
You said. Are o going TO overload
the scaffold?' did you not?"
NO; / asked if you were going to
raise the column from the staging"
Il beg your pardon, you did not"
Further controversy was cut off by
the coroner. who asked:
You built the staging for your men,
and the iron men had no business on 1t.
is hat right?"
The witness replied that was correct.