WARNERS V. "LYTTELTON TIMES" COMPANY.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 8256, 3 March 1905, Page 2

WARNERS V. "LYTTELTON TIMES" COMPANY.

A PLEA FOR AN INJUNCTION. EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT COMPANY. The case brought by Warner's, Limited, against the "Lyttelton Times" Company, in which a claim is made for £1500 damages and for an injunction to. stop noise and vibration, was again before the Supreme Court this morning, when further evidence was given for the defendant company. Charles Edgar, examined by Mr Hosking, said that he had been employed by the " Times J \ for - over twenty years. He was an engraver, and was employed throughout the term in the mechanical department. He knew the positions of all the engines and machinery in the rooms. Speaking generally, there was no comparison between the noise and vibration now and the noise and vibration before the erection of the new building in 1903. They were very much worse twenty years ago than at present. He remembered when the jobbing machinery was on the upper floor. On the floor, where the jobbing plant was worked the noise was so great that it was hard to give instructions to the machinists. The vibration in that room was so bad that a person felt that the v floor was not strong enough to hold the machines, and was glad to get out. In regard to Wharf edales, the vibration was so groat that it interfered with the work on the jobbing machines, which had, to be removed to the present site, under Warner's. Instructions could easily be given in the jobbing machine room now, and there was very little noise now. Since that time, nearly all the machinery had been replaced, and it was of J an improved character. It was always the aim of the inventor of the modern printing machine to make it as silent as possible. The two Wharfedales had been used for printing the newspaper. In place of the two Wharfedales there was one Goss machine. So far as noise and vibration were concerned, he would sooner work near thp Goss, which madevery much less noise than was made by the two Wharfedales. On the east ol the "Tinie_s" there was the Criterion Hotel, and on the west the Masonio;; The former was not adjoining, and the latter was separated from the "Times" by a slight right-of-way. _ ■___ ' ' To Mr Stringer: The old Wharfedale type was not the Wharfedale of the present day. There were- two Wharfedales in the jobbing room at present, but they were up-to-date . machines. There were no machines now in the jobbing room that were worked on the old upper floor. When the manager of the jobbing room was away witness took- his. place.- The only, overtime work was on special occasions, when it was necessary. They did not average three times a week now. He could hot say what overtime was worked in the end of 1903 and early in 1904. Since complaints were made, an endeavour was made to_ oblige Warner'.: as much as possible, in a neighbourly way, in regard to overtime work. That was before the action. George , Ardley> examined by Mr Harper, stated that he had been employed by the "Times" for twenty-, four years. He was a, paper-ruler. He used a- machine for the purpose of hia work. It was a rather delicate machine, lihe paper was placed in the machine, and the ruling was done by brass pens,, which were very delicate. They had to be arranged in a groove, and worked on a blanket. He carried out his work in the old building directly ' above the job-printing machines. The ' machine he formerly used was not a. • good as the present. There were nois« > and vibration in the old building. Th« • vibration caused the pens to be shaken [ out before the slide was fastened up, , He had occupied in the new building a room above the engine-room, and hag to do the same class of work with" a> . new machine. He did npt experience any vibration at* his new position, and had no difficulty with his pens, and attributed that fact tb the cessation of vibration. He was not occupying that place now, but did so abont twelve months after the new building we* erected. On February 11 he went into Warner's bedrooms on the first • anel second floors. He paid attention >to any noise coming from the "Times" into Warner's. He had not been in that part of Warner's old building. He remembered a door in the passage. He went to the opening first, and heard a slight noise of machinery. It was in the daytime, when the machines were in full work. After that the door wag closed, and he listened for the noise.. He could hardly hear anything at all, Mr Harper stated that one of thflf ' Wharfdales was installed before _8S!l and the other in 1884, and both were stopped about 1887, and the facts weri admitted. By consent, a. photograph of th< building attached to Mr Wigram's cvi* dence was put in.\ Sidney Luttrell, recalled by Mr Hoß< Sing, stated that in giving evidence the, previous day Tie meant that he \vifl not certain whether the walls of the "Times" and Warner's were on «k common foundation. ( There might hare been two foundations put in at differ- ' ent times. As far as he could jucfaej the foundation looked like one founcU-. tion. .1 That^ concluded the case for the defendant company. Mr Stringer said that he intended tccall' some rebutting evidence. H« •wiould call two experts to show tEst ■:■ t&erewas a reasonably practical method of suppressing the noise and vibration. Mr Hosking maintained that that question had been gone into, and the defendant had been charged with an unreasonable method pf conducting its business. Mr Macdonald had suggested the use of a turbine. The plaintiff should show that the defendant w_4 wantonly making a noise. Mr Stringer then called Samue\ Hurst Seager, architect,' who said that he had- gone through a special scientific course, and was lecturer at South Kensington on the construction Of buildings. He examined the engine-house, . machine-room, and boiler-room of the " Times " the previous night, while the Westinghouse was working. .In the engine-room there was surprisingly little noise from the Westinghouse, which could scarcely be heard. There was a very distinct vibration from the machine, and it would be communi-* cated to the steam pipes and anything else attached to the engine. The steam pipes were apparently vibrating, and they were suspended from the ceiling by iron rods. One of< the steam pipe* rested on the wall adjoining Warner's. The ceiling was resting by iron joistff ; oh the wall adjoining Warner's, and of a 14in wall adjacent to the Westing, houise engine. The l4in wall was join* . ed to east and west walls, and was dnf of the walls of the engine-house. The main shaft of the Scott; engine was car* ried along the dividing wall of the engine-house and machine-room, and rested on brackets attached to the wall. After making the examination last , night he went throtfgh the bedroomwhile the Westinghouse alone was working, and found considerable vibration in the walls of the building oc*cu- ' pied by Warner's. 'lt was also com* lriunicated to the. floors and partition*. There was a perceptible humming nois« in the rooms and passages. It was no# a loud noise. He Would not have beea able to sleep in the roomt. He accounted for the existence of thai noise coincidehtally with the absence of noise in the engine-room in thlg way: That the vibrations were coa»

r I . .■■ ■ ' = ▼eyed through the walls to the more resonant material" of the floors and partitions. The resonant material acted as a reinforcement of the sound. ' It converted the vibrations of the engine- \ room into noise, by reason of the re- j sonanoe of the material, just as a tun-ing-fork conveyed vibrations to a re- ! sonant piece of wood. Unquestionably j the vibrations of the Scott engine I would be communicated from one build- j ing to the other. To Mr Hosking: When he was in ; Warner's the engineer sent his man • down to take off the* Westinghouse and put on the Scott and disconnect the shafting used for tho jobbing plant. The vibrations from the Scott were not bo perceptible as those from the Westinghouse, and, in fact, were very flight. Mr Vincent, the engineer, was n his company the whole time, but Kent a man down. The dynamos made ; a humming noise. The timber and material of which the upper rooms were J .made were more resonant, and acted! .as developers of noise and vibration, | or, rather, naturally made the vibra- j tions apparent to the ear. The vibrations could not be felt in the, room, but - the noise could be heard. If a person put his ear to the wall or floor the source of the sound could be discovered. He distinctly felt vibration when he touched the walls and floors. • He would not naturally look for noise in I the rooms, as they, could be constructed » as to avoid the noise. The absence or presence of windows would make no difference, as it'must be cut off at»its Jource. He noticed that pugging had been placed between the joists, but that did not prevent the vibration from passing through the joists, which were splendid conductors of sound. The .i joists, he would consider, were material for conveying the sound, unless sufficiently protected. The outer light-well did not convey any sound whatever from the Westinghouse engine, and it was quite a relief to him to put his head out mtojthe well. He tested the inner light-well. He heard the same sound there as in the passages and the rooms. There was not any more there tnan in any other part. Frederick .Hubert Chamberlain, examined by Mr Alpers, said that ho was engineer to the Tramway Board. He had had sixteen years' experience as an £?\?w -• He had been em Ployed during that time on installing power and electric lighting plants, including four hotels ,n Washington, with horse-power varying from 150 to 500. . He was assistant _to the consulting engineer in '?; *™ „* Btona HoteI ' of M ST ohors0 horse -P Per0 *-er- The Washington Hotels were on similar soil to the forSl + ° n i ln ? hr , Istch «rch. The previous EEw *-_\ a , d visited the "Times" Omce with Mr Seager, and went into ■T^trner'a with Mr Seager. In a general way he agreed with Mr Seager, except that bethought Mr Seagfr 'was wrong when he stated that the shaft was not m operation when the Scott SKV^fl runni ?S. He agreed with ■What Mr Seager had said about the *team pipe, but it was virtually supported on two walls, the wall next Warners and the dividing-wall between the boiler-house and the engine £c agreed with Mr Seager's account as ftp the means of conveying the vibrations into the bedrooms and converting • El ?nto f?u nd - J hQ on] y apparent vibration of the Westinghouse engine hvas vertical, and besides that vibraX'| t!l J walla th e Btflam . pe _ had > tendency to do the same thing. - He K !& i es i£ c the inner light-well, *nd listened % sound. He could disjtiactly hear the humming or buzzing noise made by the engine when the" (Westinghouse unit was running He £lso heard the humming or buzzing in Jhe passages and rooms. fJZlJ^k^B**''-? 1 *. ****** with Mr feager that the vibrations would result |n noise in the upper rooms. He did not. think tiat the noise he heard kvhen the Westinghouse or the Scott bnit was running would keep people from sleeping unless they were very taeryous. He noticed a pipe, which the engineer told him was an exhaust pipe. Jw i* W * i h c was . told > he would say that it would not be m use while the Westinghouse unit was running It fwas connected with another pine, and mbration in one would be communicated to the other. While the Scott jngine was working, its shafting must Have been at work. The steam pipe pn the Westinghouse had a very disfcinot oscillation. The vibration of the jmgine and steampipe resulted in noise an the upper rooms. In roo m 15a he could plainly hear the pulsation of the engine^ lying in the bed with his ear close up to tho wall. h. c< M __ Alp ? r^; He did not mean that j;he Scott and Westinghouse were working together, but one at a time. TheWestinghouse unit had about a quarter load on the first time it was tried, and both engines were set going to oblige the visitors. The engines being in , good condition, would run better with a full load than a quarter load. The Bcott engine was running with a heavier load. He understood that the engineer said that the Scott engine had as full a load as it ever had. Mr Harper said that ho would like to call Mr Petre, architect, as to the tooise above. . . •> ■ His Honor said that evidence to rebut i rebutting evidence was not adI '■ missible. Mir Harper urged' that he could call evidence to rebut the evidence of Mr Beager and Mr Chamberlain: Mr . Petre had not been called because the plaintiff had not called evidence in refard to the travelling of the noise from clow. • .;,-.,. A good deal of discussion, took place between Mr Hosking and his Honor in respect to admitting further evidence oil _the point. Ultimately lm Honor said that though he had grave doubts on the matter, he would allow Mr Petre to be called. Prank William Petre, civil engineer !nd architect, with forty years' experince, practising in Dunedin, said that c bad been at the " Times " when the machinery was at work five times,, and had been m Warner's on each occasion. He heard noise m the bedrooms. There were windows all round on the lightXi_. W^wi Wa t Pa / tially on t0 P with *K k "- r S leil i, he . first entered °* the outer hght-well, in the afternoon, only tne one horizontal engine was working. SXTJSP yer I J ! ttle no - ise in the ™£* light-well on that occasion. There was E^!? u^% ° n _£ c inside of lease- ! hold building than in the light-well foThen he visited it in the evfning at nine o clock, when the Scott and .w .Westinghouse engines were both at work, the noise in the outer light-well was considerable, and the noise in the leasehold was very much greater than that which was made in the morning when the engine creating most vibration and noise, situated immediately tander the main part of the leasehold V Was working. ,He was able to satisfy ibimself of that theoretically by the fact that the sounds in the outer light-well were, concentrated with walls of good non-conducting idateria 1 ., and although . the waves of sound radiated by the reflection of the sound from side to side and from the earth below, they passed upwards, and necessarily would pass in frrhere the non-conducting matorial did not intervene, at the window openings, passing inside, and coming in contact "\ much resonant material, they ."/* *would to . a certain extent be and necessarily, magnified .Where there was most material of that sort, as in the upper floor. _Dhat, in his opinion, was the main toause of the excess of sound produced )n the building whilst the lighter engine »-a_ at work inside. The inner lighttyeil would • have a tendency of more

readily passing up to the upper floor the sound and the effect of vibrations entering into the floors or created in them. The conclusion was the omission of openings to the outer- walls con- ! nected with the outer light-well, and j the omission from the inner light-well ! altogether Avould have contributed to j the quietness of the building. The I noise was greater at the inner light- | well than in other parts of the top storey. That confirmed him in the • view that the light-wells were conduct- ! ors of the sound. The high walls around the light-well acted as a speak-ing-tube. He had specially studied acoustics. The taking of evidence was concluded at 1.15 p.m. His Honor said that he would visit the premises, probably this evening. In reply to Mr Stringer, his Honor said that he would be sorry to grant ! an interim injunction, on his own in- | terpretation of the law, and suggested j that the case should be decided as soon as possible, and it might go straight to j the Court of Appeal. i Mr Stringer said that he would discuss that point with counsel iot the < j other side. . 1 . =1