s charged as six-inch stone. It is certainly six-inch round the rting-board, where it could have en detected if the boards had en removed, but some of the oring was only five inches thick, d some three inches. This uld make a deficiency in the arge for the flooring of 1,100%. hese facts he should prove to the tisfaction of the jury, and he usted, that, when the case was osed, the jury would decide upon according to its merits, and acrding to the evidence which ould be laid before them.

The bond and specifications have g been produced,

Mr. R. Smirke was called, and camined by the attorney-general. -I am an architect, and have een in that profession for many ears. I was called on, in the tter end of December, 1824, to xamine the Custom-house. I ound several of the piers had sunk to the gravel; all of them had unk more or less. There is a row f cellars, over which is a row of varehouses, and then the Long oom. The arches of the cellar nd warehouse rest upon piers. I have read the specification, and my attention has been called to hat part of the specification which relates to the piling and to the sections. It describes that there shall be nine piles under each pier, and that they shall be placed three feet apart longitudinally, and every architect would draw that conclusion from the drawings which have been made. Under every part of the building that I have examined, I find there is a stratum of hard gravel. I found all the piers a little sunk, and, about a month after I took my examination, two of them fell in. Under one of the piers, I found only two piles; when

that pier fell, one of the piles was removed out of its place, and that was the one that chiefly supported the pier; the other touched part of the footings which projected from the pier, and did contribute a little to the support of the pier. The others did not at all support it. That pile which was under the pier did not reach the gravel. It was eleven feet long, and the gravel is invariably twelve feet deep. The piles were not twelve inches square, the mean diameter was seven or eight inches, and which was very little more than half the area of nine inches square. Under the next pier, which fell, there were only four piles which contributed to its support. The exact position of them I could not speak to, as one of them, in falling, removed the others out of their places. Not one of the piles penetrated two feet into the gravel; all of them did not reach the gravel; the piling under the walls was of the same description, not reaching to the gravel, very crooked, and in several instances the pile did not reach the sleeper, and in that case a piece of wood was put in to fill up the deficiency. There were seventy-eight of the piles less than six feet long, and it is surprising how they supported the building so long; 1,247 were taken up from under the walls and piers, seven hundred and sixty-four were not eleven feet long; 78 were under six feet long; and some of them were only three and four feet long; only one pile was sixteen feet seven inches long, and the others which were under that size, did not go into the gravel, and could not be of the smallest service. I conceive, that, if the directions in the specification had been followed, there would cer

tainly have been a safe and solid foundation. I attribute the falling of the building to the badness of the piling, and the bad manner in which the piles were driven. When this examination took place, Mr. Peto's foreman attended, and some people employed by him checked the examination. I should think that the charge of 24,000l. for the piling is more than sufficient. 1 examined the spandrels of the arches, and, instead of being filled up with solid brick work, they were filled up with lime rubbish, grouted in and covered, sometimes with one or two surfaces of bricks. About 250l. was quite sufficient for that work, when I consider the manner in which they were filled in. If they had been filled up with brick-work, the charge would have been 1,600l. I examined the boarding under the slating on the roof of the house; that boarding was quite otherwise than according to the specification. The greater part of it was materials that had been used before; some quite rotten-some were three inches long and tapering and they varied from twelve to three inches. A great many of them were decayed. I am employed in doing that which is necessary for putting the building in a proper state; I have looked at the items of charge; in the account, the spandrels of the arches are charged as solid brick-work.

Mr. George Rennie, examined by Mr. Solicitor-general. I am an engineer, and attended at the Custom-house to examine the state of it after the pier fell in; I examined the piling under the piers that had given way. Under one which had given way, there was one whole pile, and one at the corner, which, in a small degree,

contributed to the support of the pier. The one under the pier was broken. I examined two of the other piers, and the piling under them was not proper. Under one there was only one bearing pile, and the other two piles were placed at the corner. Under the other pier there were four piles, and part of another. That number of piles was not sufficient to sustain a building of that weight and magnitude. I examined the sleepers, and found some of them in a decayed state, and some of them bent. I attributed their being bent to the tops of the piles not touching the sleepers, so that the pressure was not equal. Some did not touch at all, and some did not touch uniformly. This was not a workman-like way of doing business. I found the brick-work in a crumbled and crushed state. I attribute that crumbling and crushing to the pressure occasioned by the weight of bricks which ought not to have been there. Stone ought to have been placed there, and a larger bearing. Several of the piles were bent, therefore not fit to be placed in a situation of that sort, as their being crooked detracts from their strength and solidity. I saw some of the piles after they were taken up. was only three feet long, and they varied up to five feet. The piling was not executed in a proper and workman-like manner. I attribute the falling of the pier to the badness of the piling.

One

The statements of Messrs. Smirke and Rennie were confirmed by the testimony of Messrs. Walker, Milne, Morrice, Baker, and Austen, surveyors, and Mr. John Atkins, carpenter.

The receipt of Mr. Peto for 12,9001. for the piling having been

oduced and read, the case for the rown closed.

Mr. Scarlett stated the case for e defence.-Mr. Peto, he said, got rections in writing, followed them o the letter, and, in the opinion f the inspector at the time, had ompletely done his duty. In very thing he followed the direcons of the Crown agents. It was ontended that the spandrels of the rches should have been filled up with brick-work, but there was o stipulation to that effect in the ontract. As to the materials emloyed on the roof to support the lates, they were approved by the government architect and inspector. They consisted of boards which had been put up during the progress of the building for the convenience of the workmen and for holding their tools, and which had been used as planks for scaffolding, or other such purposes. Mr. Peto was compelled by the Crown agents to purchase that timber from the government for the express purpose of applying it as he had actually done.

Mr. John Cook examined by Mr. Common Sergeant.-I was in the employ of Mr. Peto in 1813, and was his general foreman. Mr. James Day was clerk of the works in the year 1813, acting under the orders of Mr. Laing, the architect. I received orders from Mr. Day with regard to getting the level of the old vaults. After clearing away the rubbish, we began to dig for our footings under the direction of Mr. Day; 4 feet 6 was the depth we were to go; below that level we found a great number of old walls; some were of brick and stone, and some constructed with oak and chalk. When they resisted the piles, we applied to Mr. Day, I heard Mr.

Peto several times speak to Mr. Day about the discovery of old walls; I heard him say it was better to take them all away, and place York landings. Mr. Day said he would take away the walls where he thought fit; he gave such directions regularly. The first pile was, I believe, driven about the beginning of July; it was of oak. Mr. Day said there should be no more oak piles; the timber was to be beech. There was no beech then driven, and the work waited until they were supplied. I saw the beech timber supplied; it was of a very good quality, and was driven under the directions of Mr. Day. I heard Mr. Peto tell Mr. Day, when the pile-driving began, that he wished he would appoint some person to see to the pile-driving, as he (Mr. Peto) could not attend to it. A person named Mullins was appointed by Mr. Day; who came about two days after the beginning of the pile-driving. The pile-driving for the long room commenced about three months after. Mr. Day gave Mullins orders to see that the monkey struck the pile-head a certain number of times. In the first instance, we cut off with an axe the projections on the piles, and did so for several days; we were afterwards ordered not to hew off the knots, but to preserve the bark, and only to sharpen the end where the shoe was to go on. It was a very laborious operation, and the works were suspended for seven weeks. I did not perceive at the time that the oaken timber was injured; but it was not used, in consequence of the objection of Mr. Day, and new timber was then brought. There were from 120 to 130 loads of the timber not used. Mr. Day was at the

works every day, and Mr. Mullins attended to the driving of the piles. The planking commenced almost directly, and followed the piling in each place. Mr. Peto objected to the mode of planking directed by Mr. Day; if the timber should give way, it would make a great cavity. Mr. Day persisted in his order. Mr. Peto said to Mr. Day, that where the columns were to stand at the west wing, the weight would be so heavy, that he wished to have oak piles, to which Mr. Day objected, but said he would consider about it, and in the course of three days there was an order to drive oak piles. It was at the east and west wing, and not at the main body, they were driven. I took the measurement of the greatest part of the piles. I know of no one instance in which Mr. Day's orders were not strictly complied with. I was employed by the commissioners of the Customs to build the new wharf wall. I know not of any effect that wall would produce, except that it would prevent the water from getting to the foundation. I think it was watertight.

George Leyburne. The piles were cut to the length that Mr. Day ordered. They were then shod. When Mr. Day could not get down the pile as far as he wished, he had it cut off, and sometimes had another driven by ithe ordered some of the short piles to be cut off, so as to range with the sleepers; sometimes the piles took neither the planks nor the sleepers. All the piles, without any exception, were chosen by Day. The piles of the part that has come down are all beech. I never drove any beech piles but at the Custom-house, and that wood will

decay sooner than any other, if not kept under water. I mentioned this to Mr. Day at the early part of the work; he said that it was wood chosen by Mr. Rennie. He had seen the ground underneath; in his opinion it was not fit for piles to be driven into. After the first floor of the building was up, the groin of one of the arches gave way. I advised Mr. Day to clear the foundation all away, and support the column upon an inverted arch. Mr. Day said it would do very well as it was. When they first began the piling, the tide flowed in every tide; if beech is under water it will last longer. There were old drains

under the foundation.

Mr. Scarlett said, that, as it was admitted that Mr. Pete had given his opinion that piling was an improper mode, he need not prove

it.

Several other witnesses were then examined, who deposed to the same effect.

The Attorney-General replied at considerable length. He touched upon all the evidence that had been produced, and claimed a verdict for the Crown upon the whole of the issues, which were ten in number.

The Lord Chief Baron, with great perspicuity, summed up the evidence. The Jury having retired to consider their verdict, returned in half an hour for the opinion of his lordship, whether the verdict should be general, or upon the ten separate issues. His lordship said, he considered the justice of the case would be better met by a verdict upon the issues separately. Upon which they again retired; and, having consulted together for two hours, returned a verdict for the Plaintiff upon the

rst issue: That there was a straim of hard gravel into which piles ould have been driven; and for he Defendant upon all the others.

Nov. 25.

In Trinity term, the AttorneyGeneral obtained a rule to show cause in the alternative, either why judgment should not be entered up for the Crown, non obstante veredicto, on the issue which was found for the Crown, or why a new trial should not be had on that part of the verdict which found that Mr. Laing had been authorised by the commissioners to direct the buildings, as there was no evidence of any such authority having been intrusted to him. Mr. Scarlett, on behalf of the defendant, obtained a rule, calling on the Crown to show cause why a verdict should not be entered for the defendant, non obstante veredicto, or why a new trial should not be had, on the ground that there was no evidence to support the finding that a stratum of gravel could be found, into which piles could be driven according to the specifications.

In Michaelmas term, Mr. Scarlett showed cause against the rule for the Crown: he read that part of the contract between the Commissioners of the Customs and the defendant, which stated, that where any doubt arose respecting any of the particulars mentioned in the specifications, the Commissioners of the Customs, or their architect, were to direct what might or what might not be admitted; and, if in the progress of the work, the architect should think that the foundation should be sunk deeper, or that any additions should be made, or any of the particulars in the specifica

tions omitted, it should be done, and the builder should make a proportionate charge. The specification placed Mr. Peto generally under the orders of the architect; for every particular was followed up with the words, as may be di rected;" so that, in fact, it was no specification, for it only specified that some other specification may be given. It was in the power of the architect to alter every particular.

If he had ordered that the piles should be altogether omitted, ̃Mr. Peto was bound to do so; and, consequently, if he had directed that the piles should be cut shorter than was required in the specification, Mr. Peto was bound to follow his directions. The Jury had found that, Mr. Peto had, in no particular, deviated from the original specifications, unless by the directions of Mr. Laing; and by the contract Mr. Peto was liable to be discharged if, in any particular, he acted contrary to Mr. Laing's orders. The intention of the Commissioners, when entering into the contract, was evidently thisthat as far as they could then determine on their plan, it should be according to the specifications, subject to such alterations as they might, during the progress of the work, deem prudent to make. Mr. Laing was the organ of their wishes respecting such alterations. Mr. Peto's judgment was entirely subservient to his. He told Mr. Laing, that the piles would not answer the purpose, and he recommended as a substitute what Mr. Smirke had since adopted. Mr. Peto declined to abide by Mr. Laing's directions in that particular, unless he had his written orders; and could any one say, that if the Commissioners had give