IS IT HEALTHY?

Evening Post, Volume LXXXI, Issue 111, 12 May 1911, Page 8

IS IT HEALTHY?

A CONDEMNED BUILDING. SHOULD IT BE DISMANTLED ? COURT PROCEEDINGS. The premises on Lamb-ton-quay, formerly, used by Warnock and Adkin as a drapery store, have been condemned by the District Health Officer, Dr. J. P. Frengley, as unfit for occupation and dangerous to public health. Mr. Hamilton Gilmer is the owner in the title. On 20th March "last ho received notico from the City Corporation to 'remove the ' building, as required; by the by-law, within thirty' days. Thia Was no{> done, and James Doyle, Chief Municipal Inspector, instituted proceedings against Gilraer for failing to comply with the notice to dismantle. The case was begun on Wednesday, before Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., when expert technical and medical evidence was tendered on behalf of plaintiff. Proceedings were resumed 1 to-day. Mr. O'Shea, with him. Mr. T. Neave, appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. T. W. Hislop for defendant. k . Mr; O'Shea called Mr. Warnock. of Warnock and Adkin, Wanganui, who said the firm was a tenant of the property for over twenty years. Counsel : When did you first find fault .with the place? — Approximately eight or ten years ago. What was wrong with the place? — It commenced with the Labour Department threatening to reixtse to ( let u& have a license for workrooms. ' I sent thope letters to Mr. Gilmer. What was wrong with the place?; — That was upstairs : the floors were rotting away. Was anything done to that portion.?— About two or three years ago; nothing was done up till then. -What faulfc did you have to find with the building personally? — It was gener-* ally out of repair. The Magistrate : Were these faults cnmrnunicated to defendant? — Yes, I complained of several faults. What was the general condition of the building during the last' few years? — Ib, was in a bad -state. What v. r as the atmosphere of tho building?—ln some places it was all right, and in some all wrong. There was a close smell. ATMOSPHERE AND DISINFECTANTS. It was not eau-de-Cologne was it-^-the smell that came from the building?— It was offensive". Did you take step to keep that smell down? — We sprinkled disinfectants over the floor. The dampness of the walls and the rain getting in ruined stock at times, added witness. In other places than ' those mentioned stock was destroyed occasionally through dampness. Mr. O'Shea: What was tho condition of the timber throughout the building? — 'Some was all right, some all wrong. Was the floor ever taken up? — The floor was taken up about three years ago. What was the effect ,of the atmosphere on your health? — When the floor was twken up the second night I was taken Witness added that he was told by Dr. Boyd that he had just escaped typhoid. Was there anyone elbe in your employ became ill about this time?— Yes, one. He was away for some weeks. In reply to a question, witness said that there was not so much sioknes6 in the Wanganui shop as here. He added, in reference to a comment by his Worship, that ho had ' come down from Wanganui against Ids will. Did you ever make an attempt to leave that shop ?— Tes. Why did you not try to get out of the place ? — We could not get another suitable place. DEAD EATS.Questioned further, witness^ said that the only repairs done were done some two or three years ago after the place was condemned. New Floors were put in upstairs, new floors in the clothing and fancy department downstairs, and repairs to the walls, roof, and uprights. After the 3ate fire, other repairs and replacements were effected. To Mr. Hislop : ,He held 205, Lamb-ton-quay on a monthly tenancy. You were under no obligation to rsmain there ? — No. Did not the owner point out to you that you were keeping the place in a filthy condition ? — No, I don't remember them saying any such thing. All the time we were in the business the owners were never upstairs where the girls had their lundi-rooni. Were there never any dead rats about ? Yes. at times. Did these not cause smells ? — Yes, but not all of them. Ts not the place subject to floods ?—? — Yes. • Has not the pla/ce been flooded dozens of times ? — No, fcJie place was not flooded a dozen times. Witness added that flood-water in the winter overflowed the footpath, and went underneath the shop, lie would not say the water came up so ireque-ntiy. Being cro&j-examined on the question of emelle witn-eec, becoming irritated, said: — "I am going to launch out hot and strong" (on tho question of the state of the atmosphere in the shop). "I'll go at it strong. You are saying things that are not trms. It ie not true about thoso" scraps iv 'the lunchroom upetairs. I've been thinking it over. Gilmer and Maguire u r ere never upstairs while we were there." Mr. Hi«lop wanted to know what had precipitated the remarks. He did not want witnices to keep anything back. Witn-?£i3 : You have aaid things that •are not true. Mi*. Hislop : What have 1 eaid that is not tri'io? Witness : About the lunchroom scrape. The ovmers were never up in that room. To 3ftr. Hislop : Witness said he tried till he/ w.i-s tired to get something done to thf i premises. . Did you tell the landlords on any occasion that you were forced to go away, from l.be place in the evening on recount of the smells? — I don't reraeir/ber having done so. W/as the place in a bad condition wlkbi your kaee expired? — Ye&> I believe so. $ Were you not hound by the terms of your lease to k«ip tho place in repair? — That ie «o. And yet you route to this court and ta Ik about the place being in such di«I'ipair? — It was kopt in ordinary repair i''»paii-j» which we lir.d carried out. ' Was there no dispute between the mvners and you fliat you had not fulfilled the conditions of your 1 lease ac to repairs?— No. thei'o wius no dispute. You laid poison for the rats? — I r>b- j lj?cled to lading poVon but it may have i/ueen dove without my consent. j I FEET THROUGH A CEILING. j i Mr. O'Shea : Tell me what you were ' goin» to toll Mi. Hisd-op us to the effects of the inside atinosphero? — Well, one , effect was this : that a lot of our ru,-;- ! i tomcl's would now come into the place, and (ithet'n v^oiiltl not «lou becaunu of the rxWi. 'i he assistants wen? aiwa'.e j jji'ov.'linp;. "1 flor'l v-i:i» v: have \<j \ t •!' lh.t«i> 'lijngfr," i:v h'ldod. *!• U'Shfi: W-hn.l rbout thp ceiling.' Did rn\t something ocoiu in legavd tocno of the ceilinsta ?— Y-ee i t£e tirct I

floor ceiling was in such a bad condition that come of the workroom girls' feet came through. Did both feet come through? — I don't kftow. II 11I 1 expect the girls had to hold themselves up with one foot. John Stick, an employee for seyen years (up till 1910) of Warnock and Adkin, aleo gave evidence. DR. MAKGILL'S EVIDENCE. Dr. Makgill, District Health Officer, Auckland, and formerly holding a similar position in Wellington, deposed to having examined' 205, Lambton-quay, in July, 1907. He condemned the butfding. It was then generally in a. sad ) state 01 disrepair, ventilation below the floor was practically absent, numer- • ous parts of the building were gone, and I passages upstairs were ill-lit, twisted, ' and narrow in parts. If the timber of the building were examined piece by ! piece ho believed it would be found that 80 per cent, would have been found worm-eaten, and 60 per cent, utterly unsound. Rubbish had accumulated. (Proceeding.)