NIHOTUPU DAM UNSAFE?

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 233, 21 December 1927, Page 13

NIHOTUPU DAM UNSAFE?

Wall Said to Contain “Muck” Instead of Good-Quality Sand

EVIDENCE IN MURRAY INQUIRY

A FEATURE of the evidence before the special committee of the City Council dealing with the allegations of engineering waste this morning was a strong attack on doings in connection with the Nihotupu dam, and an allegation that the dam was unsafe owing to “muck" having been used instead of sand.

TN resuming' the evidence this morn- -*■ ing Mark Willis, once a driver with Morgan and Docherty, said he had seen chippings from the Matheson quarry delivered as blue metal spawls to city works over a period of some days. He mentioned another case where three seven-yard loads of metal were supposed to have been delivered, and Mr. Bush, city engineer, who was present, remarked that there was not a decent seven yards in the whole of the three loads. Witness had his tickets signed for 21 yards. Witness delivered three yards of scoria to Foreman Gifford at Point Chevalier . as six yards of blue metal rubble. Gifford said he did not mind scoria, hut “blue metal” was to be kept off the tickets. From what witness had heard previously when he heard Mr. Morgan say, “This is a bit too cheeky,” 1 inferring to shifting metal from the tramway barn to another city work, he formed the opinion that the loads were short. Witness had made out tickets for more than he delivered. His employers knew, but they had given no instructions to have it done. MORE SHORT MEASUREMENTS Benjamin O’Brien, a stone cutter once employed at the asylum quarry, said he had been told it was useless his trying to get a contract with the city, as the. orders were full, but a man named Wooton said he could get orders, as he was a friend of Mr. Tyler. Witness also gave evidence of short measurement in loads. Drivers told witness that they could take short loads owing to several firms supplying, and the difficulty of checking. Witness considered that for good stone cut up to specifications the present price paid by the city was about right. EASY MONEY In a volunteered statement witness said a man named Elliott was buying from Wooton from a city quarry at the Stone Jug for 9d, carting them to another quarry and selling to the council at Is or Is Id. Eiliott had told him it paid him better than having witness cutting. This' was some two years ago. W. A. Subrisky opened up a new aspect, his evidence covering work at Nihotupu dam, witness having been in charge of the wharf at Muddy Creek. DAM UNSAFE The bonus system, according to witness, resulted in Captain Daniels speeding up the sand delivery. Hundreds of yard of “muck” had come in, which, in the opinion of witness and other people, made the dam unsafe. Witness complained of the quality and was sacked by Mr. Pearce, and reinstated by Mr. Tyler. Mr. Tyler said he would see that the sand was better, but hundreds of yards of “muck” continued. “With the amount of rotten sand and stuff that went into that dam, and with people living below it, I don’t consider it safe,” asserted witness. “It was so bad that my father said he would stop the works if the sand was not better, and after that it was better, but not good enough.” “Hundreds and hundreds of yards went in that was not lit to go in a backyard. I say that emphatically,” asserted witness. Witness said that all the time he was there the council got full quantity, but he could not do more than he did to secure quality. A special steel rope, five inches in circumference, over 2,000 feet long and conservatively valued at £SOO, when he took it down from' the dam and oiled it and wound it on tressles, is at present lying rusty and considerably depreciated at Muddy Creek according to this witness. A LYNCHING PARTY He understood it was proposed to use it at Huia and if someone was killed as a result—well there should be a lynching party. Mr. McLiver: Would it be strong enough for that?—l doubt it. Continuing, witness said a huge amount of chaff, oats and bran was wasted at Muddy Creek, and his representations to have less ordered were ignored. At the moment about a hundred bags were going to waste there. He considered hundreds and hundreds of pounds were wasted by the council’s system of leasing out its punts and launch. Mr. Tyler: You were engaged as a labourer. Witness said he had charge of the wharf whatever his rating, and signed for hundreds and thousands of tons of material. Witness denied that he had any grievance whatever. Mr. McLiver: I would like that down. There has been a suggestion that ai) our witnesses have arr axe to grind, and that accordingly they should not be believed. Witness said he knew what went into the dam. Mud did. Even if i* had been tipped over the side it was paid for by the city. ANOTHER SOLICITOR At this stage Mr. Matheson. chief of the council ganger staff, said that he was the subject of serious charges, and he asked permission to have a solicitor present. This was agreed to by the chairman, and Mr. A. C. Jacobs entered to watch proceedings on behalf of Mr. Matheson. “AIR OF HOSTILITY” This was followed by a diversion in the re-entry of the witness Willis, who explained a point in his evidence. He remarked that as soon as he entered the room there was an air of hostility. Cr. Phelan: What causes him to say that? Witness: Well, everyone is talking at once, and I gathered it from the looks on the faces. The Chairman, Cr. J. empsey: You must be a mind-reader. He assured wit'ness that there was no hostility. Harry P. Taylor, who knew something about engines, said he had in-

spected a big engine used at Nihotupu. It, was housed in a shed, open at one end, was in very bad condition, but some attempt har apparently been made to grease it within a week or so. The locomotive new was worth £1,500, and was utterly neglected. . He saw the steel rope in bad order, 100 tons of cement in the creek, and a steel gantrey which-required immediate attention. Witness then went on to produce metal samples picked up by him. When Mr. Bush asked a question witness refused to answer, and said he would not be side-tracked by an official. Witness, in reply to a remark by Cr. Casey, said he would not he browbeaten by the committee. (Proceeding.)

YESTERDAY’S EVIDENCE

MAGISTERIAL INQUIRY IS SUGGESTED

According to a statement made yesterday, Cr. W. H. Murray hopes to produce evidence that will justify the council in asking for a magisterial inquiry into the whole position. CPHE question of expenses arose when the committee indicated that it might want some of the witnesses recalled. “Mr. Murray will not baulk at a few shillings in doing what he considers his duty to the ratepayers, but if we have to keep on paying for recalling of witnesses that will be one way of preventing the inquiry continuing,” remarked Mr. F. McLiver, acting on Councillor Murray’s behalf. The chairman. Councillor J. Dempsey remarked that there would be no expenses to meet in connection with council employees, and he had no doubt the committee would pay for witnesses it wanted recalled. Mr. McLiver indicated that the committee might be expected to go further than that after it had heard all the evidence. The taking of evidence continued throughout yesterday afternoon and to late last night. STONE-CUTTER’S EVIDENCE Peter Tostevin, stone-cutter, stated that, among others, Mr. Matheson, of the City Council staff, employed him. He said Matheson got him and his brother to cut in his quarry, and he paid them in cash, called frequently, and issued all instructions. Matheson had a partner named Gordon. Stone was never delivered in Matheson’s name by his instructions. Either Gordon’s or Bray’s or Doherty’s name was used. A lot of stone was carted to the City Council. Very often all pitchers were sent forward as half each kerbs and pitchers. Little, the lorry driver, objected, and witness told Matheson, who said he would soon fix him. Bray sacked Little soon afterwards. The area stone was taken from was certainly a quarry. He and his brother went from Matheson’s to two other places, lasting four days at one and six weeks at another, and they had suspicions as to the capse, as there was plenty of work. LOST ALL HE POSSESSED Frank Williamson, of Williamson and Sons, Ltd., stated that he had lost at least £SOO by the council refusing to give him orders for kerbs and pitchers. Witness had inquired for orders practically every week. He had lost everything he possessed including his war gratuity by the refusal. W. J. Williamson, father of the witness, corroborated this. According to John Barbarich, the city was buying at fourpencs a foot more than the Public Works Department. He had quoted 9gd for kerbs and 78d for pitchers to the Public Works, and the price had not been low enough. • Arthur Semple alleged that two men, Church and Duncan, had done work for outsiders while on council pay. He understood they had received £8 and £25, and this had been “whacked up” with the ganger, Scott. A stone contractor, E. J. Dunn, said he would have condemned a quarter of some of the stone and kerbs and pitchers he had seen sent to the City Council. T. H. Mclntyre, lorry-driver, employed by Morgan and Doherty, said he had heard Mr. Matheson say, “Tell the boys at the pit to keep the stuff up to the usual standard, as members of the Works Committee are going round.” There was no suggestion that the material was not always up to standard, but there was always a scare on these occasions. The inquiry adjourned at this stage.