CLAIM FOR £77,850.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20273, 26 June 1931, Page 13

CLAIM FOR £77,850.

FIRE IN MEAT WORKS. DEFENDANTS* CASE CONTINUED (PRESS ASSOCIATION TBLEQBAK.) GISBORNE,.June 25. The hearing of the Wairoa ■ Meat Company's claim of £77,850 from the New Zealand and Eagle £>tar Assurance Companies,, following the destruction of the works by fire after the earthquake in February, entered on its seventh day this morning. W. R. Gummer, architect, of Auckland, the principal witness for the defence, continued his evidence, this being the third day in which witness has occupied the box. 'Under cross-examination, witness admitted that some of the photographs had been retouched to demonstrate cracks, but this had been done solely to explain his evidence, not with the object of , emphasising the damage. Some damage may have been caused by fire, but the bulk was due to the earthquake and must have been apparent to anyone looking for damage. He would not say that the managing director faas not speaking the truth when he said that he saw no damage, but thought he was unobservant. Witifess admitted that the photographs might not be a fair representation of the damage immediately after the fire, because further earthquakes had occurred before the photographs were taken. Witness said the cracks in the western, wall of the fellmongery were about 25ft up. He had not examined them from a ladder, but considered they went right through the wall, basing this on the damage elsewhere in the works. From the ground he had no difficulty in distinguishing fire and earthquake cracks. „ William Ifenes, Wairoa Borough electrical engineer, said on the day of the fire there was no pressure in the water mains on either side of the river, ex cept for. trials of about twenty minutes. Apart from the: traffic bridge damage, there were few leaks in the pipeline. This closed the casefdr she defence.

Evidence in BebuttaL Giving evidence in rebuttal, L. A. Litchfield, shift engineer, put in fragments of metal from the fire, these com* ing from various parts. Andrew D. Davys, Gisborne, ; engin-. eer, wl» examined the metal fragments, expressed the opinion that most: of the pieces had been subjected at least to' 1820 degrees of hea,t, and one piece to 2200 degrees Fahrenheit. Gross-examined, he said "he had not made temperature tests regarding tho fusion points of the metal. He based his judgment on standard tables. Beginald Trevor-Smith, Public Works Department Engineer, Wairoa, stated that the removal of the roof above the f ellmongjery , would. .tend .to increase earthquake damage, since experience was that rpofs had a bracing effect. The position might be different when the ends of the roof were not tied down to the walls. * Edmund Anscombe, architect, Wellington, said , he visited the Wairoa •works on March 13th. He believed the cracks in the tallow department were not serious structurally. There was no need to rebuild this portion, as stated by Mr Gummer, as it stood the earthquake very welL He considered the roof/of the fellmongery acted as a brace to - the walls in case of an earthquake. Most damage to columns would be expected at the bases. The Court adjourned till to-morrow.