THE CONDEMNED BUILDING

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7445, 20 May 1911, Page 1

THE CONDEMNED BUILDING

■ . DECISION KESERYED.;i Tlio lic."'.rin" of tlio case in which James Doylo' Chief Corporation ■ Inspector;, proceeded against Hamilton Gilmer fo.r not complying ; with an. order to pull down the premises in which Wa.rnock and idkin formerly carried on,, business: as drapers in Lambton quay, was cpncludcd yesterday afternoon. ■ , Hr O’Shea. City Solicitor, appeared for plaintiff. _and Mr T. W. Hielop for defend. ■’ IV. 0. Chatflcld. ; continuing his evidence of the previous day, said that , long experience no doubt contributed •to his becoming a member of the Eoyal Sanitary Institute. Ho did not have anything to do with ■ alterations that ", were trade at too time of the fire in the building. - ■ ‘ • - - Henry Maitland, builder, stated, that* he had examined the building very exhaustively, and he • did not think there would bo • much ■ trouble in- renovating 'the premises, except on the north wall. He’would lower tho hack yard close to the. bank and then on to the bnf ding; thus a current of air would bo able to pass under the premises. Approximately .6250 to £3OO would cover the, cost of repairing the ihuilding, Howou'd sav the-old building put-up new would cost £3503 to £4OOO In its’ present state -do huilding would probably lie worth £2VOO Witness- thought that Mr Morton's statement that the Drat floor wou'd not support the weight of a number of people or of merchandise was incorrect. ~ John Matthews,. builder, agreed .with the evidence- of the two previous witnesses. Some of the flooring seemed to be deoavet, but the lots’3 and slee”ers were not. ascent where they touched tho ground. He saw evidences of the barer, but not enough to condemn the-building. This concluderj tho evidence. Hla Worship said ho would give his decision on the 25th instant.