Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1913-07-28
MAKE SURE OF THE SAFETY OF THE ARMoRY

The Bulletins stand in connection with
the construction Of the new armory has already
been upheld by the action of the contractors
The method of putting up the trusses has been
changed, and the great 10O-foot trusses will not
be put in place until the supporting steel col
umns are erected and firmly braced. The single
truss that remained after the accident of last
week has been taken down
Deputy Sheriff Rose is making as complete an
Investigation of the matter as possible under the
somewhat limited jurisdiction OF the coroner's
jury. But the investigation should not end here
The Star Bulletin has produced the correspond
ence to show the doubt that existed in the minds
Of architects and contractors as to the safety of
the armory work-taking into account the light
ness of the steel pillars and the manner in which
the steel was being erected That doubt should
not be allowed to remain There have been
enough scandals in public building work in the
states; Honolulu does not want scandal.
There have been enough horrible accidents due
to structural flaws-in material or in design or
in method-Honoluu does not want an accident.
Whether the accident that cost mans life
was due to any structural defects is really a mil
nor question-very possibly it was not, and i'll
will be for the coroner's jury TO say The vital
point is that the circumstances surrounding this
accident have brought out the serious question
as to the safety of the armory job.
The question, it is now established, has been
the subject of much correspondence between the
architects and contractors, involved in the inn
mediate discussion as to the order of the work.
That question was brought before the superin-
tendent public works, who employed a steel
expert to investigate and report. The steel ex-
pert SAYS, unofficially, that as a steel man he
would put more steel into the building than was
used.
Another and still more vital point is that pub
lie buildings are being erected in the territory
under a system which permits the architects to-
employ their own inspectors on the work. The
territory, through the department of public
works, passes On the original plans and later on,
when the building is finished, may either accept
or reject the building The territory, however,
does not officially inspect the building in course
of construction except on concrete work.
1t is stated that "ths is the usual practice ;"
The fact that it is the usual practice does not
make it the right practice IL has been brought
out that the very important correspondence be-
tween the architects and the contractors was
never referred TO the department of public
works because that was not considered neces-
sary under the usual practice. Changes were
made-changes involving the element of safety
--of which tile department of public works was
not informed 1t was not so specified in the CON
tract. Not only was the territory ignorant of
the details of these changes, but probably pow
erIess in ease it had wished to interfere.
The system is wrong, because the territory
the public--is not sufficiently protected 1t is
mt M as an argument that iii case the armory,
..complete. did not come up to specifications, it
Md be rejected That is true, but rejection
vi involve not only the probability of three
years of litigation, hut the certainty that