Evening star., 1922-02-09
IMPROPER WALLS
BLAMEDFOR CRASH
ATKN|CKERBOCKER
Coroner's Jury Told Theater
Roof Fell Because OF Weak
Support.
WORKMAN SAYS THING
LACKED FULL "PLUGGlNG"

Laborer Declares He Heard Crack
ing Noise at Movie House on
Afternoon of Disaster.
Improper wall construction was
brought out today as the cause Tor
the collapse of the roof of the knick-
erbocker Theater, In testimony at the
coroner's inquest being conducted in
the boardroom Of the District build
Ing.
John Howard Ford, who redesigned
the roof framing, and furnished the
steel, testified that II the walls had
stood intact the roof would be stand
ing today. He asserted that no matter
how much stronger the steel construc-
tion had been made. 1t would have
fallen just the same, pointing out
that 1t was designed with a safety
factor four times greater tnan any
possible load it would bear. He called
the attention Of the jury to the point
that not a piece OF steel had shown
any defect or had broken. except as
caused during the crash to the floor.
He agreed with the statement OF
Col. Kelly in toto as to the defective
construction of the building, but indi-
Gated he didn't believe that Col. Kelly
found fault directly with the steel
work.
Unable to FIJI Thing.
of the walls was followed by that
of Charles E. Fisher. colored, in
charge of laying the reinforcing con-
crete. The latter said that the tiltng
was supposed to be filled with con-
crete. but that Ut could not be made ds
layer Yas filled as it was set up. This
was not done, he said. and when asked
If he reported the fact to the fore
man, he said that the latter knew
that 1t could not be DONE Fisher said
to be there. under the building condi.
tions and the formation of the tile all
the tile could not be plugged"
Bud" Fisher. laborer. said ne
heard a shearing noise IN & The buiid, "a
reported to some one in the theater.
He said the noise was clearly audible.
Works Outside once Hours.
Mai. Gordon. United Sattes district
attorney. developed. during the testi-
mony Of r. H. Davis. computing en-
sasss N .s shs R,s,sst Iast & sasaF
side Of Office hours for contractors In
going over plans The district attor-
ney, however, was unsuctessful In
getting from the witness . statement
There was = noticeable filling OF
in the attendance at the inquest to-
day, the spectators for the most part
being attorneys and other represents.
tives Of people directly or indirectly
The inquest at 12:4o o'clock took ..
recess.
steeIworker On Stand.
Charles E. Fritts, Mount Rainier
Nd. a structural steelworker. first
took the stand when the inquest was
resumed at 1850 todav.
The biggest part Of the steelwork
was up when he arrived on the job.
he said. He worked two days He
told the jury that he made no COM
ment to any one regarding the con-
struction.
'Did you see anything questionable
about the construction" asked Cor
oner Nevitt.
TT wasn't my business to say any.
thing" replied the witness
Well, it's your business to say 1t
You are under OATH"
We'll. didn't like the walls" wit
ness answered.
DO you know whether tho tiles
were supposed to be filled with con-
II don't know"
would it have been safer?" con-
tinued the coroner.
If filled with concrete 1t would
have been safer" witness said.
Maj. Gordon then examined the wit
ness as to whether he was with the
Witness Donaldson. who testified day
before yesterday. when the wall was
set.
Witness had no recollection.
Does Not Remember Remark.
ibid you hear Donaldson make any
statement regarding the safety Of the
walls?' asked Assistant Corporation
Counsel Hart.
II do not remember"
DO you know whether any Of these
beams were shorter than was intend
edP" resumed the coroner.
''The ones I set seemed to have
two or three" witness responded.
Again questioned regarding Donald
sons remarks as to safety. lie in
sisted that he had no recollection. :.
He was excused and John Howard
the steel roof framing, resumed the
stand to continue his testimony start
ed yesterday.
Column C-2 carried the main truss
from the south wall, Ford testified.
drawing on q blackboard a diagram
of them, at the direction of Maj.
Gordon. who was conducting the ex-
animation. e.
In the original layout all beams run
in either an east and west or north
and south direction, he continued.
I'm connecting on my approved
plan and the basis OF our order I
considered 1t desirable to have a
more direct connection between
column 3 and column 5, and SO put In
a beam directly between the two
Mr.. Ford said. r.. -
Tied to Truss.
Was column ca tied to any
TT was tied to truss TIC" Mr..
Ford replied.
why wasn't column 2 braced by
being attached to B-l0?"
BIO is a long beam ten feet away
from CO and has no side stiffeners
from column :" witaess said.
"EJ adding c-4l ! considered that
would stiffen' the two columns" wit
ness added. Column ran to the
under side Of the roof slab, and col.
umn only part Of the way up
supported by the brick wall?"
"Yes. all the roof was supported by
the walls" -ts
The interrogations Of Maj Gordon
centered around the two columns
and their bracings and stiHenings.
The column was steel one-piece
roller member, measuring. eight inches
H. resting on a steel base at the foun-
dations. extending through the balcony
to . splice Joint, and through that Joint
to the roof and trusses centering on
the spot. witness said. -
Draw that column In sections, 20
CONTINUED on Page ., Column -
t--... So