The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1913-07-29
JURY FAILS To
PLACE BLAME
Death of Gus Anderson the Result
Of Injuries Received in Fall
From Armory, Is Verdict; Ex-
perts Say Work and Material
Are First-class; Worlmen Differ

1--WE find, said the coroner s Jury
in it's verdict yesterday afternoon,
"That Gus Anderson came to his death
from a fracture of the skull and hemor.
rhage caused by the fall of steel
truss on which he was working, the ac.
cident occurring at the new Armory
Building, corner of Hotel and Miller
streets, now in course Of constructions -
The jury failed to fix the blame.
With that verdict the jury closed
one of the most important cases that
coroner has handled in this district
for number of years, yesterdays SEES.
sion featuring considerable conflicting
testimony as to the blame to be at.
tached for the falling of the second
steel truss on Thursday last, which re.
suited in the death of Anderson.
Approved by Experts.
Expert engineers and practical struc.
tWal workers differed widely in their
conclusions regarding the nature of the
work and the plans for the building,
the former asserting emphatically that
there was absolutely nothing wrong
with either the plans of the building,
the manner of construction, or the
quality of the material. The workmcn,
partners of the man who was killed
Thursday, stuck to their previous state.
ments that the steel could not carry
the weight it was supposed to support
and that it was iron instead of steel
anyway. rI
Among the engineers who did not
agree with those statements were Su.
perintendent of Public Works Cald.
well, william C. Furer, Prof. j. M.
Young, and Inspector Nealand, who rep.
resented the architects. Mr.. Caldwell
did not express decided opinion on
the matter as he said the supervision
and inspection of the construction of
the building was intrusted to others
under contract. The report on the
work that is being made for him by
Furer, he said, would hardly bring out
| any facts relative to the accident.
Furer testified that he saw nothing
| to lead him to believe that the struc,
ture as planned by the architects and
revised by structural engineers would
not support its own weight and the
weight of the roof. .f,.
! 81 Young Made Minor Changes.
| The most important testimony of the
day wastgiven by j. NJ. Young, of the
College of Hawaii and noted for his ex.
dperience'in structural work of that
kind The manufacturers of the steel
work, it developed, had questioned some
minor details in the plans and report
ed them back to the architects, stating
that if they would get the opinion of
| Mr.. Young on the work, they would
be willing to act on his endorsement
hnreservedly. These letters were
quoted at the inquest by Mr.. Ripley of
the architects firm. ~.
| Mr.. Young testified that he had gone
over the plans twice and made some
slight alterations lie believed the
method of construction was proper and
that the building would be absolutely
safe after completion.
Mr.. Nealand, inspector for the arch
fleets, testified that he had examined
the material that had gone into that
work and that he found it in GOOD
shape and according to specifications
Condemned by Workmen.
j. g. johnson and Lee Turner, work
men employed by the sub-contractor,
on the structure were the other two
witnesses. Turner stated that wheI
the first truss had been set on the col
umns and the knee braces had been at
tached, one of the columns at once
bent in .he middle with the weight.
He asserted emphatically that thu
steel work would not support its owl
weight, much less that of the roof
which he estimated would weight 20t
pounds to the square yard.
-s.%-s-