Carlisle Patriot, 10 Sep 1825 - Arbitration Cause - LOWDEN v. NIXSON (6)

[petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk]

Saturday 10 Sep 1825   (p. 2, col. 5 - p. 3, col. 6)

 

IMPORTANT ARBITRATION CAUSE.

LOWDEN v. NIXSON.

 

[continued]

 

Mr. HODGSON then called the following witnesses for the defendant.

 

Mr. Richard CONNELL.—I now live at Spittle, but I farmed Hayclose when the contract was made. I did not act as Mr. LOWDEN's agent, nor undertake any superintendence. After I had occupied the house some time, the front turned damp, it being an exposed situation. It was proposed to cement it. I was present at a meeting between plaintiff, defendant, and WILSON, and it was agreed that the latter should have £63 for the job, the parties leaving me to say who should pay, and I decided that Mr. LOWDEN and Mr. NIXSON should be £25 each, and GASH £13. It was thought that the cement would cure the rain. Mr. LOWDEN paid the whole. A well was to be sunk. They first sunk one near the present; they did not sink deep, but bored without finding water. They tried to bring a spring from behind the house, with cobble drain, but from quicksand it went in again. Another well was sunk without success; the pant water got into it. I have had hay spoiled, to the amount of six cart loads in a year, by the rain coming in at the roof and the joining of the walls. It was pointed in the second year. The store-room is not boarded; there is a cellar under the back parlour, which is flagged. For many of the buildings the sand was very bad. I was anxious to have the byers and stables finished. The floors are very open in the bed-rooms, the wood being unseasoned. Mr. NIXSON said he should be busy that summer, and wished to relet the work. They ceased building in November; the weather was bad. The gravel-pit was easy to get at, and a good road to it, only there were many stones in it. Mr. LOWDEN made me no allowance for the building not being done in time. The timber was sawn on the spot. I was at Hayclose nearly six years, and put on slates that had been blown from all the houses. Before Mr. L. came there, he made no complaints. Nothing was said about timber at the contract; common American was used.

 

Cross-examined by Mr. AGLIONBY.—I don't know the difference in timber. They at first determined to take sand from the gravel-pit, but they afterwards took loam soil from behind the pig-sties. The buildings were not ready by the 20th of October, the time specified—not finished till the end of May. The plaintiff was in London, and did not see the buildings till finished. It was recommended to Mr. NIXSON to sink a well before he began to build, but he did not do so. The present well is of no use; and in very dry weather water is brought a mile and a half. At the meeting about the contract, there was no force used but an offer of an extra hundred guineas to induce Mr. NIXSON to take it, Mr. NIXSON saying some little things might have been omitted. We found the wall damp in the second year, and I complained to Mr. LOWDEN; the defendant was also complained to, and the Roman cement was suggested as a cure; but though it did some good, it did not answer the purpose. The wet came in very much, especially at the windows, and buckets were set under the ceiling to catch it. My window-curtains, carpets, and beds have suffered; I had furniture spoiled to the amount of £20. The inside of the walls was not filled. The pig-stie wall fell down, and I then saw the defect. The deficiencies in the foundation have been discovered since I left. I have seen the rain come into the barn. I do not consider it a proper and comfortable house. There was a back smoke in the rooms above, when the fire was lighted below. The sum of £9 2s. was paid by Mr. LOWDEN for bringing water into the well, which had an insufficient supply. Mr. NIXSON knew the place before he made the contract; and the present house is lower and less exposed than the old one. The barn was made four feet wider than was at first intended. Some stoothing was done in the back parlour. I observed no shrinks, but the walls were not straight. In consequence of my complaint, Mr. NIXSON hung bells. He found grates and iron work; the estimate and plan were to be given to Mr. LOWDEN, but Mr. N. never would give it, although something was said about a copy.

 

Daniel DAWSON, waller and slater, of the Abbey-Holm, had seen the slates at Hayclose, and considered them to have sufficient lap, and the buildings were chiefly covered with white moss slate, which is the best. He considered split laths better than sawn ones, and prefers pins to nails because they do not corrode and rust. Reeds were commonly used some time back, but he thought laths best. The walls are built according to the custom of the country, and as he would have built them had he been contractor. He had been employed to build walls for Lord Lonsdale, under Mr. PROCTOR's direction at Mr. Samuel RIGG's, and they were built in a manner similar to Hayclose walls. At that building American timber was used, they finding their own. He saw the opening in the walls at Hayclose on the 19th of August. In building, when the outside is finished, he filled the middle with loose stones, 16 or 18 inches high, and then a course of morter—two or three courses of morter in the 16 or 18 inches.

 

Cross-examined.—I have built and contracted for houses and erected them in the way described; there is no difference between Abbey-house and Hayclose, but the stone. I only saw one place out of perpendicular, but there might be others. I have seen some morter taken from the walls; but I will not swear I examined more than three places: Mr. MOOR was with me. I expect that the foundation of the cattle sheds was laid dry, according to the custom of the country. Except the south end of the house, the other foundations were right, and done in a workmanlike manner, but the work was rough. I don't say it was so good a house as a man can wish; but I should expect that a person objecting to it was unreasonable. I consider split laths best, and don't know that every builder considers sawn ones better, and I never saw copper nails, though I have heard of their use. We were between two and three hours among the buildings. The generality of the morter was remarkably good—as good as the country can produce. The sand is good in the barn, byer, gig-house, and stables; I produce specimens of the morter from different places; they all appear to be mixed with the same sand.

 

Re-examined.—Speaking generally, the roof was a good one.

 

Joseph MOOR.—I have been a mason at Wigton 20 years, and employ 20 or 30 men. I examined the buildings at Hayclose in April and August. The walls are built according to the custom of the country. I found several holes broke chiefly in the under part of the course, five or six feet from the ground. The courses are 16, 18, or 20 inches; we put the larger stones outside, and fill the remainder with loose stones; some people preferring loose fillings to morter, because the wall is dryer. There was no fault in the foundations but the overshot at the house end; I think it is better now then if under-pinned; it was perhaps a mistake of the builder. The walls are according to the custom of the country. There is a shrink in the gig-house from the motion of the machine and weight of the granary. It is common to lay foundations for one course without morter. Upright joints are not considered good walling; if continued eight or ten feet, they are nor workmanlike.

 

Cross-examined, he said he went to Hayclose, the first time, with Mr. DENTON; the second time, with DAWSON, but did not examine very particularly. The wall between the barn and the byre was not done properly. There might be places that he did not see. He believed that there was morter in the inside of the wall; a little might fall from the top of a course, or be squeezed from a stone in the wall; but from all that I have seen (he continued), I cannot say whether there is any morter inside or not. The quality of the morter is good. Strong sand makes the best; and generally, but not altogether, this is made with strong sand. The piece now shewn is not good. Except the south end of the house, all the foundations are good: in every foundation I saw, morter was used after the first stone. In the gig-house I saw no morter in the foundations.

 

 

[to be continued]