SEACLIFF ASYLUM BUILDING MS INQUIRY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 8112, 22 February 1888, Page 4

SEACLIFF ASYLUM BUILDING MS INQUIRY.

The inquiry into the condition of the Seacliff Asylum building was resumed at 2 p.ni. yesterday. All tho commissioners were present—viz, Messrs Higgi::son (chairman), Skiunar, and Mountford.

Mr Lawson intimated that he had detrrrnincc to t-mnloy a solicitor to help iiiai in the inquiry as it was a new experience to him, and ho fell at a great disadvantage in having to content with Mr Blair, who was well up ia tLost matters.

Mr Bl.uk objected to Mr Lawson bringing in a solicitor. Before the inquiry was begun he asked Mr Lawson and Mr Gore if they intended to employ counsel, and they both replied "No," and therefore ho (the sneaker) hnd not employed a solicitor to work for him. Ho had now nearlj finished his case, and it would bo unfair that, a solicitor should now appear. He could uot cope with a lawyer, and would not undertake to do so. Jf Mr Lawson had one, he (tho speaker) must have one, and the c.^3 would have to be begun de noio.

Mr ¥. U. Chapman asked to be allowed to appear for Mr Lswboii and said that the appearance of counsel at these inquiries was usual, and he apprehended that if the application hud been made at the beginning of the inquiry it would havtj bteu granted almost as a matter of course. If counsel were employed from this stage, he apprehended that Mr Blair would not be put to any disadvantage, and that ho (Mr Chapman) was the only ouo who would be putto any inconvenience, as ho should have to pick up the points of the case from the inquire as it progressed and from reading the evidence as it was transcribed. He thought that his appearance would not delay or retard the inquiry. Tho Chairman asko-1 what Sir Lawsou's object was in employing a solicitor.

Mr Lawson said it was simply to promote the truth.

Tho Chairman said tho commissioners had hail an idea of what was going to come up, and they had therefore considered tBo matter fully this morning, and had come to the conclusion upon it to admit legal talent at this stags of tho proceedings. It was understood at the outset that no legal talent should be introduced, ard it woidd be unfair to allow this now, and also unnecessary. There was no legal pomt involved, tho object cf the inquiry being merely to elicit facts upou which tho commissioners would report. Mr Chapman might be pn-sent to advi-e Mr Law-

son, but not to ta'io part in tho proceedings or to cross-ex.imiue wihitsscs.

Mr Lawsou said lie would submit to the ruling of the commissioners, but he felt he was at a great disadvantage. Mr Blair asked if ho would be allowed also to have a solicitor to advises him as Mr Lawson had. Tho Chairman: Yes, of course, a doz>.-n if you like. Mr Lawsen said that it was his intention to

have entered fully into a statement as to the

initiation of the present inquiry, but would not do so now. Suttico it to say that after much difficulty it had been obtained, and certainly not too snou, through his agency, and ho was glad that tho opportunity was now given, and before a competent tribunal, for ascertaining the cause of the injuries done and even now progressing at tho north wing of the asylum. That cause he hoped to be able to establish by testimony of the clearest and most indisputable character, and in doing so would wholly separate it from the multiplicity of subjects which had been needlessly but semewhafc skilfully and systematically grouped around it, evidently with the object of screening it from view, and so warping tho judgment sought for in tho whole matter. Ho should further follow up step by stop the sworn statement of Mr Blair as given before the commission, and should show by testimony that could uot bo disputed that all the charges he therein made, so far at least as he (Mr Lawson)

was concerned, were totally groundless and

unjust, and that it was, to say the least of it, extremely discreditable to a gentleman occupying Mr Blair's position, and having access to the very documents which prove his (Mr Lawson's) case, that ho should make such a statement as he had done. Mr Lawson then read a letter which ho had written to Mr Blair calling attention to the urgent necessity of con-

structing drainage trenches so as to intercept tho ur.der-curreut of ground drainage which was causing the movement of tho foundations at the temporary buildings at Seacliff. That

was dated October 23, 1ST!), and no reply had ever been sent. Ho also wrote on January 10, ISSO, pointing out the need for speedy action being taken us to the preliminary work at the site on the new permanent buildings. On June 29, ISBO, he communicated with Mr Blair in reference to a slip that had occurred, and suggesting that a main isolating drain should bo formed. This letter also pointed out that if

the works were suspended, tho contractor might have a claim for compensation. lie (Mr Lawson) had never received a reply to that hitter. On March 9,1881, he once more wrote to Mr Blair in connection with tho water supply, isolating drain, and drainage of trenches, but receipt of the letter was not acknowledged. In a letter to

Mr Brindley, dated April 24, JSB-J-, he (Mr Lawion) stated that Mr CJore bad managed to raise

liis account from £5970 to/iS-J-U, nm! suggesting that Mr Brindley should appoint n clay for looking over the accounts. Mr Lnwson also quoted from communications addressed by hi;u to Mr Ussher in reference to Dr Grablmoi's reports, and read letters received from Mr Ussher on 26th May, 11th June, and 11th September 1885, to show that the department were

aware of the slip. Mr Lawsou intimated that ho would ask for tho production of all corrua-

pnud.-nce between Air Blair and My Uk<4kt on th.it subject. The letter book from which

Mr Lawson hud read was then tendered in evidence. Mr Lawsou then went on to deny

that he had ever resiled from the position ho took up that this matter of constructing a main isolating drain was an urgent necessity. No. 1 drain was not deep enough; Nos. 2 and 3 drains were the same, and dangerous to the structure. They went 17ft underneath tho foundation, and over No. 3 was auother cutting which was called a gallery. Mr Blair had said that he gave more drains than were asked for. That was true. Nos, 2 and 3 were more than he (Mr Lawson) htA nsked for—there was no question of that—aiid, perhaps, more than the country

asked for. If the isolating drain had been constructed it would have prevented the upperground drainage from descending and causing the damage; and he asked if it was not more reasonable to say that this want of isolation had caused the trouble than to attribute it to a deflection of half an inch or three-eighths in ?a(t. Mr Blair's insinuation that Mr Brindley was Mr Lawson's creature was untrue. He was prepared to go through tho wholo matters that had been brought up, item by item. The drain should, he maintained, have been an open drain as far as practicable ; and where not open it should have been a tunnel. The situ of the isolating drain that was still necessary he was prepared to point out, and also to see the drain constructed so that the building might bo prevented from further injury. Dr Huctor's report would repay reading, and should be read by the public. It was because of the reasons mentioned in Dr Ifector'n report that lie had been so urgent in asking li:nt the drninnp: works .should be done in ISbl, mid Mr JJUir now advisedly came and proved 111 at niitfoiiiK lut'l been .low.; till the building was completed. Nothing could liavn been morn prophet!'; than Dr Heritor's report. The danger Hint had U;':ti n;ipruhendud by him had \,kku real, nnd llii:r<:sii]ts had followed its indicated in the report. Acting upon a portion of the report hu hud carried the foundation of the tower to tho bed rock and the towers Bland firm and secure to this day. lie had submitted the whole thing to Mr Blair nt tho time and asked for instructions, which to this hour be had never received. Tho evidence of what was looked for from the site was before them, and the necessary .results had followed. Many similar .slins had occurred in Dunedin where the same means that had botii adopted by th<: deportment at .Seacliff had been tried with the result that the cure was worse than the disease, but when streets were cut which acted as isolating drains the sites had hardened and the movement stopped. It was, ha maintained, for want of the isolating drain that the damage had occurred at Seacliff. Was it not absurd to say that a deflectiou of half-an-inch in 72t't had caused the damage, when they could see that the hill was moving. Certain points Cpillars one and seven) in the building were absolutely level; there was uo.evideneo of sinkage, and it was reasonable to assume that the difference of half-an-inch was due merely to rough workmanship by the plasterers. Mr Briudley was the servant of the Government, the Government inspector on the works. As such he had always been regarded, and as such he had always acted. Ho (witness) had recommended Mr Brindley for the appointment simply because Mr Briudley was efficient, honourable, and upright. On his suggestion tho site of the building had been brought five chains south, and he would have advised that the building should be brought further south had it not been for the district road, It would have been a good thing for all to have closed the road and to have brought the building still further south. [The witness here referred to alterations made in the foundations, the result of which was that there was an extra of more than £1700 oa account of the greater quantity of concrete used.] In a letter to the inspector on the question of the foundations, witness said that the matter was one that must be largely left to the inspectors discretion, but directing him in any case of doubt to err on the safe side, and to go down until he felt thorougly secure. If writing general directions under the same circumstances again, witness felt thit he could not do better. There was certainly no intention to allow the work lo bo "scamped." Witness read largely from the correspondence between himself and inspector, which he maintained showed clearly that there was no friction between Mr Brindley and himself, other than what honest men would have. They had begun in a friendly spirit, and ended in a friendly spirit. Witness totally and emphatically denied ever having asked Mr Brindley to prepare detailed plans, with fine exception, thai application was in writing, and tho refusal to prepare it was ako in writing. All the details proper he prepared himself, and they were in his oliice now. From time to time Mr Briudley did prepare details, but not at his (Mr Lawson's) request. Mr Brindley never once complained that he was kept copying or making detailed drawings, nor had ho asksd for any consideration for detailed drawings, and such a thing had never been mentioned so far a? he could remember. As to the bricks, whole kilns were condemned, the good with the bad, because he would not allow the chance of smuggling iv bad bricks with the good ones. It was true that towards the close of the contrsct some bricks that were not quite as good as the others had been allowed because of the desire there was to get possession of the building, but that was the only thing that could be Slid to be anything approaching to bad mnterfr.l from tha pinnacle of the tower to the lowest depth of the foundation. Mr Blair, he maintained, had insinuated that he had suggested that bid work should be pa=seil. This had been done by j quoting the plirr.se in which he had recoin- j mended Mr Prindley to work amicabiy with the j contractor. The words which followed the recommendations to work amicably were, " I always get contractors to do as I wish best by iii.v.iner," aiul subsequently he suggested that extreme measures should only be resorted to for important and serious reasons. Surely there was nothirg improper iv this, ntid h< maintained there was nothing to justify the bn«e insinuation that had been buried at him. He had chalk-nywl and still challenged th« department tn show ono inch of verticil settlement in the building, r.ud asserted that the statement made that the injury was caused hy tho settlement of the foundations was absurd, and that it had been caused, as predicted by Dr Hector, by the hill slipping in au easterly direction.

f<cl r L-iwspii h."re intimated that he had a good fU'al 11HTL to s.\y ir. his statement, and thr.t be would prttVr to continue his remarks after f.u adjournment;

The inquiry was adjourned at 5 p.m. until 10 a.m. to-morrow (Thursday).