THE MONTPELLIER SCAFFOLDING ACCIDENT.

Evening Star, Issue 8611, 3 September 1891, Page 4

THE MONTPELLIER SCAFFOLDING ACCIDENT.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib, Daring my examination at the inquest on Monday I said I considered that there were weaker parts still remaining than the portion that gave way. I mentioned several times that the jury ought to inspect the scaffold. There were pieces 2in by fin between 6ft and Sft long, with only one 2£in nail to support bearer, planks, and men. I should have liked the jury to have seen those pieces that were then remaining. On Tuesday morning, after the inquiry, I got a contractor to go with me to inspect the scaffold ; but, although we got to Montpellier at about half-past nine o’clock, the scaffold was all down with the exception of a small portion on the left front and side. The only remaining bracket had an additional brace—a piece of 4iu by lin flooring about Sft long alongside of which the original 2in by fin brace that was still remaining looked like a lath. There was a young man working on the scaffold ; hence the reason for the additional brace, I wish to draw attention to the fact that the scaffold was to have stood until the second coating was finished, and no doubt would have done so had nob the accident happened.

I had several witnesses who could have testified to the weakness of the braces, but, through being led by the police to believe that it was my duty to inform witnesses to be present, and Coroner Carew not being able to let me know what hour the inquest would be held until nearly eleven o’clock (the inquest took. place at a quarter-past two o’clock), I bad not sufficient time to inform them to be present. I maintain that a piece of timber 2in wide by fin thick and over 4ft long is not strong enough to support a scaffold. —I am, etc., W. H. Brodrick, Dunedin, September 2.