The question on which this case turns is one of fact, whether the addition to the Foundry Company’s building to enable it *61to make steel castings, was a “ substantial addition ” within the Act of June 4, 1901, P. L. 481, so as to give the lien claimants who furnished material for its construction, a preference in the distribution of the fund. The auditor’s finding to that effect was approved by the court and we have not been convinced that they were in error.

Judgment affirmed.