DISTRICT COURT—THIS DAY.

Auckland Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 167, 18 July 1887, Page 8

DISTRICT COURT—THIS DAY.

(Beforo District Judge Seth Smith.)

The Epiphany Church Dispute. T. Holder v, the Rev. Dr. O'Callagiian AND __tE T_*.t_9__*E- OF THE EPIPHANY CHURCH.—CIaim, ±62 15s, for sen-ices rendered as architect.—Mr Mahony appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Gover for the defendants.—The evidence for the plaintiff., as continued. The first witness called was R. Vincent Ellis, architect and building surveyor, who deposed that he examined theconorete of the foundations and found it setting nicely. He was satisfied with the manner in which the buildinghadbeen put up. The witness here examined samples of concrete produced in Court, and said that the proportions appeared all right, although it had not set. It might set in time, as there was a good proportion of lime in it.— By Mr Cover: The concrete produced would harden if placed in <_Snt_ct with damp. He Would hot like a wall of concrete unless it could get damped a little to cause it to set. He would not consider it very bad concrete. There was something wrong with the lime in the sample of concrete produced.—His Honor here examined the sample, and it broke to pieces between his fingers, although a year old. — It all depended upon the position of the building as to the time -which concrete took to set. The concrete produced might set in time. Tho bulk of the concrete was hardening: from thfe exterior inwards.—Edmund Bell, architect, practising in Auckland, deposed that, in company with Messrs Ussher, Holder, Hobson and Fowler he examined the Epiphany Church last Saturday. Speaking generally, the concrete walls were substantial, although a hole had been knocked into one of them. Mr Ussher removed some of the earth around the concrete walls, and witness was enabled to examine the concrete. Mr Ussher used the pick on the wall, but made very little impression. Mr Ussher was a powerful man and struck the wall pretty hard. He also tried the internal walls with the pick. The internal walls had not set so hard as the external ones, still they looked all right. The external walls were harder than the interior ones simply because they had received more moisture. There were no signs of cracks visible in tho foundations. The concrete produced appeared quite rich enough. Concrete continued hardening for many years.—By Mr Gover :He should say that the sample of concrete produced was an average one. The average concrete, if dried too quickly, would be like the sample produced. Still, he should say it was not the best concrete. It appeared, if anything, to have too much lime in it. In valuing concrete, they must always consider the position in which the concrete was placed. When Mr Ussher struck with the pickixe, he should have considered the average wall.—Draper Fowler, architect, deposed to having also examined the walls of the Church. He found the outer wall very solid and strong. He considered the concrete to be of very good quality, and it would, no doubt, increase in strength. He thonght that the walls would carry 10 times the weight ab present imposed upon them. Did not think a pick was a fail* test to such a wall. If anything, there was an excess of lime in the samples produced in court. The proportions appeared to be about 5 to 1.- Thomas Helson also gave evidence for the plaintiff He considered the foundations quite strong enough for the building. He would nob he afraid to impose a'much heavier weight upon such foundations. Ib was not bad concrete.

(Lefb Sitting.)