the Week of Proper 28 / Ordinary 33
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Encyclopedias
Fire and Fire Extinction
1911 Encyclopedia Britannica
or Fire is considered in this article, primarily, from the point of view of the protection against fire that can be accorded by preventive measures and by the organization of fire extinguishing establishments.
History is full of accounts of devastation caused by fires in towns and cities of nearly every country in the civilized world. The following is a list of notable fires of early days: Great Britain And Ireland 798. London, nearly destroyed.
982. „ greater part of the city burned.
1086. „ all houses and churches from the east to the west gate burned.
1212. „ greater part of the city burned.
1666. „ "The Great Fire," September 2-6.
It began in a wooden house in Pudding Lane, and burned for three days, consuming the buildings on 436 acres, 400 streets, lanes, &c., 13,200 houses, with St Paul's church, 86 parish churches, 6 chapels, the guild-hall, the royal exchange, the custom-house, many hospitals and libraries, 52 companies' halls, and a vast number of other stately edifices, together with three of the city gates, four stone bridges, and the prisons of Newgate, the Fleet, and the Poultry and Wood Street Compters. The fire swept from the Tower to Temple church, and from the N.E. gate to Holborn bridge. Six persons were killed. The total loss of property was estimated at the time to be £10,730,500.
1 794. London, 630 houses destroyed at Wapping. Loss above £ 1,000,000.
1834. Houses of Parliament burned.
1861. „ Tooley Street wharves, &c., burned. Loss estimated at £2,000,000.
1873. „ Alexandra palace destroyed.
1137. York, totally destroyed.
1184. Glastonbury, town and abbey burned.
1292. Carlisle, destroyed.
1507. Norwich, nearly destroyed; 718 houses burned.
1 544. Leith, burned.
1598. Tiverton, 400 houses and a large number of horses burned; 33 persons killed. Loss, £150,000.
1612. „ 600 houses burned. Loss over £200,000.
1731. „ 300 houses burned.
1700. Edinburgh, " the Great Fire." 1612. Cork, greater part burned, and again in 1622.1613. Dorchester, nearly destroyed. Loss, £200,000.1614. Stratford-on-Avon, burned.
1644. Beaminster, burned. Again in 1684 and 1781.1675. Northampton, almost totally destroyed. 1683. Newmarket, large part of the town burned.
1694. Warwick, more than half burned; rebuilt by national con tribution.
1707. Lisburn, burned.
1727. Gravesend, destroyed.
1738. Wellingborough, Boo houses burned.
1 743. Crediton, 450 houses destroyed.
1760. Portsmouth, dockyard burned. Loss, £400,000.1770. „ Loss, £,00,000.1802. Liverpool, destructive fire. Loss, £I,000,000.
1827. Sheerness, 50 houses and much property destroyed. 1854. Gateshead, 50 persons killed. Loss, £1,000,000.1875. Glasgow. Great fire. Loss, £300,000.
France 59. Lyons, burned to ashes. Nero offers to rebuild it.
1118. Nantes, greater part of the city destroyed.
1137. Dijon, burned.
1524. Troyes, nearly destroyed.
1720. Rennes, on fire from December 22 to 29.850 houses burned. 1784. Brest. Fire and explosion in dockyard. Loss, £1,000,000.1862. Marseilles, destructive fire.
1871. Paris. Communist devastations. Property destroyed, £32,000,000.
Central And Southern Europe 64. Rome burned during 8 days. Po of the 14 wards of the city were destroyed.
i106. Venice, greater part of the city was burned.
1577. fire at the arsenal, greater part of the city ruined by an explosion.
1299. Weimar, destructive fire; also in 1424 and 1618.
1379. Memel was in large part destroyed, and again in 1 457, 1540, 1678, 1854.
1405. Bern was destroyed.
1420. Leipzig lost 400 houses.
1 457. Dort, cathedral and large part of the town burned. 1491. Dresden was destroyed.
1521. Oviedo, large part of the city destroyed.
1 543. Komorn was burned.
1634. Furth was burned by Austrian Croats.
1680. Furth was again destroyed.
1686. Landau was almost destroyed.
1758. Pirna was burned by Prussians. 260 houses destroyed. 1762. Munich lost 200 houses.
1764. Konigsberg, public buildings, &c., burned. Loss, £600,000.1769. „ almost destroyed.
1784. Rok i tzan (Bohemia) was totally destroyed. Loss, £300,000.1801. Brody, 1500 houses destroyed.
1859. „ moo houses destroyed.
1803. Posen, large part of older portion of city burned.
1811. Forest fires in Tyrol destroyed 64 villages and hamlets. 1818. Salzburg was partly destroyed.
1842. Hamburg. A fire raged for Poo hours, May 5-7.
During the fire the city was in a state of anarchy. 4219 buildings, including 2000 dwellings, were destroyed. Onefifth of the population was made homeless, and loo persons lost their lives. The total loss amounted to £7,000,000. After the fire, contributions from all Germany came in to help to rebuild the city.
1861. Glarus (Switzerland),500 houses burned.
Northern Europe 1530. Aalborg, almost entirely destroyed.
1541. Aarhuus, almost entirely destroyed, and again in 1556.1624. Opslo, nearly destroyed. Christiania was built on the site. 1702. Bergen, greater part of the town destroyed.
1728. Copenhagen, nearly destroyed. 1650 houses burned, 77 streets. 1794. royal palace with contents burned.
1 795. „ 50 streets, 1563 houses burned.
1751. Stockholm, moo houses destroyed.
1 759. „ 250 houses burned. Loss, 2,000,000 crowns. 1 775. Abo, 200 houses and 15 mills burned.
1827.. „ 780 houses burned, with the university.
1790. Carlscrona, 1087 houses, churches, warehouses, &c., destroyed. 1802. Gothenburg, 178 houses burned.
1858. Christiania. Loss estimated at £250,000.
1865. Carlstadt (Sweden), everything burned except the bishop's residence, hospital and jail. 10 lives lost.
Russia 1736. St Petersburg, 2000 houses burned.
1862. fire. Loss, £i,000,000. 1752. Moscow, 18,000 houses burned.
1812. „ The Russians fired the city on September 14 to drive out the army of Napoleon. The fire continued five days. Nine-tenths of the city was destroyed. Number of houses burned, 30,800. Loss, £30,000,000.
1 753. Archangel, 900 houses burned.
1 793. „ 3000 buildings and the cathedral burned. 1786. Tobolsk, nearly destroyed.
1788. Mitau, nearly destroyed.
1812. Riga, partly destroyed.
1834. Tula, destructive fire.
1848. Orel, large part of the town destroyed.
1850. Cracow, large part of the town burned.
1864. Novgorod, large amount of property destroyed.
Turkey The following fires have occurred at Constantinople:- 1729. A great fire destroyed 12,000 houses and 7000 people. 1745. A fire lasted five days.
1750. In January, 10,000 houses burned; in April, property destroyed estimated from £1,000,000 to £3,000,000. Later in the year 10,000 houses were destroyed.
1751.4000 houses were burned.
1756.15,000 houses and loo people destroyed. During the years 1761, 1765 and 1767 great havoc was made by fire. 1769. July 17. A fire raged for twelve hours, extending nearly i m.
in length. Many of the palaces, some small mosques and nearly 650 houses were destroyed.
A fire lasting 15 hours consumed 2500 houses and shops. 1778.2000 houses were burned.
1782. August 12. A fire burned three days: 10,000 houses, 50 mosques and 100 corn mills destroyed; loo lives lost. In February, 600 houses burned; in June, 7000 more.
1784. August 5. A fire burned for 26 hours and destroyed 10,000 houses, most of which had been rebuilt since the fires of 1782. In the same year, March 13, a fire in the suburb of Pera destroyed two-thirds of that quarter. Loss estimated at 2,000,000 florins.
1791. Between March and July 32,000 houses are said to have been burned, and as many in 1795.
1 799. In the suburb of Pera 13,000 houses were burned and many magnificent buildings.
1816. August 16.12,000 houses and 3000 shops in the finest quarter were destroyed.
1818. August 13. A fire destroyed several thousand houses. 1826. A fire destroyed 6000 houses.
1848.500 houses and 2000 shops destroyed. Loss estimated at £3,000,000.
1865. A great fire destroyed 2800 houses, public buildings, &c. Over 22,000 people were left homeless.
1870. June 5. The suburb of Pera, occupied by the foreign population and native Christians, was swept by a fire which destroyed over 7000 buildings, many of them among the best in the city, including the residence of the foreign legations. Loss estimated at nearly £5,000,000.
1 797. Scutari, the town of 3000 houses totally destroyed. 1763. Smyrna, 2600 houses consumed. Loss, £200,000.
1772. „ 3000 dwellings burned. 3000 to 4000 shops, &c. consumed. Loss, £4,000,000.
4000 shops, mosques, magazines, &c., burned. 12,000 houses were burned.
India 1631. Rajmahal. Palace and great part of the town burned. 1 799. Manilla, vast storehouses were burned.
1833. „ 10,000 huts were burned, March 26.30,000 people rendered homeless, and 50 lives lost.
1803. Madras, more than 1000 houses burned.
1803. Bombay. Loss by fire of £600,000.
China And Japan 1822. Canton was nearly destroyed by fire.
1866. Yokohama, two-thirds of the native town and one-sixth of the foreign settlement destroyed.
1872. Yeddo. A fire occurred in April during a gale of wind, destroying buildings covering a space of 6 sq. m. 20,000 persons were made homeless.
1873. A fire destroyed io,000 houses.
United States 1679. Boston. All the warehouses, 80 dwellings, and the vessels in the dockyards were consumed. Loss, £200,000.
1760. A fire caused a loss estimated at £100,000.
1787. A fire consumed loo buildings, February 20.
1 794.96 buildings were burned. Loss, £42,000.
1872. Great fire, November 9 -10. By this fire the richest quarter of Boston was destroyed.
The fire commenced at the corner of Summer and Kingston streets. The area burned over was 65 acres. 77 6 buildings, comprising the largest granite and brick warehouses of the city, filled with merchandise, were burned. The loss was about £15,000,000. Before the end of the year 1876 the burned district had been rebuilt more substantially than ever.
1778. Charleston (S.C.). A fire caused the loss of £100,000.1796. „ 300 houses were burned.
1838. „ One-half the city was burned on April 27.1158 buildings destroyed. Loss, £600,000.
1802. Portsmouth (N.H.), 102 buildings destroyed.
1813.„ 397 buildings destroyed.
1820. Savannah, 463 buildings were burned. Loss, £800,000.
1835. New York. The great fire of New York began in 1VIerchant Street, December 16, and burned 530 buildings in the business part of the city. moo mercantile firms lost their places of business. The area burned over was 52 acres. The loss was £3,000,000.
1845. A fire in the business part of the city, July 20, destroyed 300 buildings. The loss was £1,500,000.35 persons were killed.
1845. Pittsburg. A large part of the city burned, April II. 20 squares, I loo buildings destroyed. Loss, £2,000,000.1846. Nantucket was almost destroyed.
1848. Albany. 600 houses burned, August 17. Area burned over 37 acres, one-third of the city. Loss, £600,000.
1849. St Louis. 23 steamboats at the wharves, and the whole or part of 15 blocks of the city burned, May 17. Loss, £600,000.
1851. More than three-quarters of the city was burned, May 4.2500 buildings. Loss, £2,200,000.
1851. „ 500 buildings burned. Loss, £600,000.
1850. Philadelphia. 400 buildings burned, July 9.30 lives lost. Loss, £200,000.
1865.50 buildings burned, February 8.20 persons killed. Loss, £100,000.
1851. Washington. Part of the Capitol and the whole of the Congressional Library were burned.
1851. San Francisco. On May 4-5 a fire destroyed 2500 buildings.
A number of lives lost. More than three-fourths of the city destroyed. Loss, upwards of £2,000,000. In June another fire burned 500 buildings. Loss estimated at £600,000.1857. Chicago. A fire destroyed over £100,000.14 lives lost. 1859. „ Property destroyed worth £ioo,000, Sept. 15.
1866.„ Two fires on August 10 and November 18. Loss, £100,000 each.
1871. „ The greatest fire of modern times.
It began in a barn on the night of the 8th of October and raged until the loth. The area burned over was 2124 acres, or 33 sq. m., of the very heart of the city. 250 lives were lost, 98,500 persons were made homeless, and 17,430 buildings were consumed. The buildings were one-third in number and one-half in value of the buildings of the city. Before the end of 1875 the whole burned district had been rebuilt. The loss was estimated at £39,000,000.
1862. Troy (N.Y. ) was nearly destroyed by fire.
1866. Portland (Maine). Great fire on July 4. One-half of the city was burned; 200 acres were ravaged; 50 buildings were blown up to stop the progress of the fire. Loss, £2,000,000 to £2,250,000.
1871. October. Forest and prairie fires in Wisconsin and Michigan. 15,000 persons were made homeless; moo lives lost. Loss estimated at £600,000.
British North America 1815. Quebec was injured to the extent of £260,000.
1845. „ 1650 houses were burned, May 28. One-third of the population made homeless. Loss from £400,000 to £750,000. Another fire, on June 28, consumed 1300 dwellings. 6000 persons were made homeless. 30 streets destroyed. Insurance losses, £60,770.
1866. „ 2500 houses and 17 churches in French quarter burned.
1825. New Brunswick. A tract of 4,000,000 acres, more than loo m. in length, was burned over; it included many towns. 160 persons killed, and 875 head of cattle. 590 buildings burned. Loss, about £60,000. Towns of New castle, Chatham and Douglastown destroyed.
1837. St John (New Brunswick). 115 houses burned, January 13, and nearly all the business part of the city. Loss, £1,000,000.
1796.
1841. „ 1877. St. John. Great fire on June 21. The area burned over was 200 acres. 37 streets and squares totally or in part destroyed; 10 m. of streets; 1650 dwellings. 18 lives lost. Total loss, £2,500,000. Two-fifths of the city burned.
1846. St John's (Newfoundland) was nearly destroyed, June 9. Two whole streets burned upwards of 1 m. long. Loss estimated at £1,000,000.
1850. Montreal. A fire destroyed the finest part of the city on June 7.200 houses were burned.
1852. A fire on July 9 rendered 10,000 people destitute. The space burned was 1 m. in length by 2 m. in width, including 1200 houses. Loss, £1,000,000.
South America 1536. Cuzco was nearly consumed.
1861. Mendoza. A great fire followed an earthquake which had destroyed 10,000 people.
1862. Valparaiso was devastated by fire.
1863. Santiago. Fire in the Jesuit church; 2000 persons, mostly women and children, perished.
West Indies 1752. Pierre (Martinique) had 700 houses burned.
1782. Kingston (Jamaica) had 80 houses burned. Loss, £500,000.1795. Montego Bay (Jamaica). Loss by fire of £400,000.1805. St Thomas. 900 warehouses consumed. Loss, £6,000,000.1808. Spanish Town (Trinidad) was totally destroyed. Loss esti mated at £1,500,000.
1828. Havana lost 350 houses; 2000 persons reduced to poverty. 1843. Port Republicain (Haiti). Nearly one-third of the town was burned.
Since this list was compiled, there have been further notable fires, more particularly in North America, the great conflagrations at Chicago, Baltimore and San Francisco being terrible examples. But speaking generally, these conflagrations, extensive as they were, only repeated the earlier lessons as to the necessity of combating the general negligence of the public by attaching far greater importance to the development of firepreventive measures even than to the better organization of the fire-fighting establishments.
It may be of interest to mention notable fires in the British empire, and London in particular, during the decade 1890 to 1899.
Port of Spain (Trinidad). March 4, 1895 New Westminster (British Columbia) Sept. 10, 1898 Toronto (Ontario)Jan. 6, 10, and March 3, 1895 Windsor (Nova Scotia) .. Oct. 17, 1897 St John's (Newfoundland) J u l y 8, 1892 London - Charterhouse Square. Dec. 25, 1889 St Mary Axe. .. July 18, 1893 Old Bailey and Fleet Street. Nov. 15, 1893 Tabernacle Street, Finsbury June 21, 1894 Bermondsey Leather Market
Sept. 13, 1894
May 17, 1895 Minories. Nov. To, 1894 South-West India Docks. Feb. 8, 1895 Charlotte and Leonard Streets, Finsbury June 10, 1896 „ Cripplegate Nov. 19, 1897 Nottingham Nov. 17, 1894 Sheffield Dec. 21, 1893 Bradford Nov.30, 1896 Sunderland. July 18, 1898 Dublin. May 4, 1894 Glasgow - Anderston Quay Jan. 16, 1897 „ Dunlop Street April 25, 1898 As to fires in any one specific class of building, the extraordinary number of fires that occurred in theatres and similar places of public entertainment up to the close of the 19th century calls for mention. Since that time, however, there has been a considerable abatement in this respect, owing to the adoption of successful measures of fire prevention. A list of some 1100 fires was published by Edwin O. Sachs in 1897 ( Fires at Public Entertainments ), and the results of these fires analysed. They involved a recorded loss of life to the extent of 9350 souls. About half of them (584) occurred in Europe, and the remainder in other parts of the world. Since the publication of that list extraordinary efforts have been made in all countries to reduce the risk of fires in public entertainments. The only notable disaster that has occurred since was that at the Iroquois Theatre at Chicago.
The annual drain in loss of life and in property through fires is far greater than is generally realized, and although the loss of life and property is being materially reduced from year to year, mainly by the fire-preventive measures that are now making themselves felt, the annual fire wastage of the world still averages quite £50,000,000 sterling. It is extremely difficult to obtain precise data as to the fire loss, insured and uninsured, but it may be assumed that in Great Britain the annual average loss by fire, towards the end of the 19th century (say 1897), was about £ 17,000,000 sterling, and that this had been materially reduced by 1909 to probably somewhere about £12,000,000 sterling. This extraordinary diminution in the fire waste of Great Britain, - in spite of the daily increasing number of houses, and the increasing amount of property in buildings - is in the main owing to the fire-preventive measures, which have led to a better class of new building and a great improvement in existing structures, and further, to a greater display of intelligence and interest in general fire precautionary measures by the public.
Notable improvements in the fire service have been effected, more particularly in London and in the country towns of the south of England since 1903. The International Fire Exhibition held in 1903 at Earl's Court, and the Fire Prevention Congress of the same year, may be said to have revolutionized thought on the subject of fire brigade organization and equipment in the British empire; but, for all that, the advance made by the fire service has not been so rapid as the development of the firepreventive side of fire protection.
Fire Protection
The term "Fire Protection" is often misunderstood. Fire-extinguishing - in other words, fire brigade work - is what the majority understand by it, and many towns consider themselves well protected if they can boast of an efficiently manned fire-engine establishment. The fire brigade as such, however, has but a minor role in a rational system of protection. Really well-protected towns owe their condition in the first place to properly applied preventive legislation, based on the practical experience and research of architects, engineers, fire experts and insurance and municipal officials. Fire protection is a combination of fire prevention, fire combating and fire research.
Under the heading of "Fire Prevention" should be classed all preventive measures, including the education of the public; and under the heading "Fire Combating" should be classed both self-help and outside help.
Preventive measures may be the result of private initiative, but as a rule they are defined by the local authority, and contained partly in Building Acts, and partly in separate codes of fire-survey regulations - supplemented, if necessary, by special rules as to the treatment of extraordinary risks, such as the storage of petroleum, the manufacture of explosives, and theatrical performances. The education of the public may be simply such as can be begun informally at school and continued by official or semi-official warnings, and a judicious arrangement with the newspapers as to the tendency of their fire reports.
Such forms of training have already been successfully introduced. There are English towns where the authorities have, for instance, had some of the meaningless fables of the old elementary school Standard Reader replaced by more instructive ones, which warn children not to play with matches, and teach them to run for help in case of an emergency. Instructive copy-book headings have been arranged in place of the meaningless sentences so often used in elementary schools. There are a number of municipalities where regular warnings are issued every December as to the dangerous Christmas-tree. In such places every inhabitant has at least an opportunity of learning how to throw a bucket of water properly, and how to trip up a burning woman and roll her up without fanning the flames. The householder is officially informed where the nearest fire-call point is, and how long he must expect to wait till the first engine can reach his house. If he is a newspaper reader, he will also have ample opportunity of knowing the resources of his town, and the local reporter's fire report will give him much useful information based on facts or hints supplied by the authorities.
Both self-help and outside help must be classed under the heading of "Fire Combating." Self-help mainly deals with the protection of large risks, such as factories, stores and public places of amusement, which lend themselves to regulation.
The requirements of the fire survey code may allow for hydrants or sprinklers in certain risks, and also for their regular inspection, and the means for self-help may thus be given. These means will, however, probably not be properly employed unless some of the employes engaged on the risk are instructed as to their purpose, and have confidence in the apparatus at their disposal. The possibility of proper self-help in dangerous risks may be encouraged by enforcing regular drills for the employes, and regular inspections to test their efficiency. There are towns where great reliance is placed on the efforts of such amateur firemen. In some cities they even receive extra pay and are formed into units, properly uniformed and equipped, and retained by the fire brigade as a reserve force for emergencies.
Self-help for the shopkeeper, the lodger or the householder can scarcely be regulated. The opportunities already mentioned for the education of the public, if properly utilized, would assure intelligent behaviour on the part of a large percentage of the community. There are places where, without any regulation being attempted, and thanks entirely to the influence referred to, most residences can boast of a hand-pump, a bucket, and a crowbar, the proper use of which is known to most of the household. Self-help in small risks may, however, be distinctly encouraged by the authorities, without any irksome interference with personal liberty, simply by the provision of street pillarboxes, with the necessaries of first aid, including perhaps a couple of scaling ladders, and, further, by opportunities being given to householders to learn how to handle them. If a street pillarbox of this kind be put in a fire-station, and certain afternoons in the year be reserved on which this elementary instruction will be given, and the students afterwards shown over the fire-station or treated to a "turn-out," a considerable number will be found to take advantage of the opportunity. No matter whether curiosity or real interest brings them, the object in view will be attained.
Under "outside" help should be understood what is organized, and not simply such as is tendered by the casual passer-by or by a neighbour. The link between self-help and outside help is the fire-call.
The Fire-Call
The efficiency of the fire-call depends not only on the instrument employed and its position, but also on its conspicuous appearance, and the indications by which its situation may be discovered. These indications are quite as important as the instruments themselves. The conspicuousness of the instrument alone does not suffice. Of the official notifications given in the press, those in regard to the position of the call-points are among the most useful. An indication at every street corner as to the direction to take to reach the point - or perhaps better, the conspicuous advertisement of the nearest call-point over every post pillar-box and inside every front door - may enable the veriest stranger to call assistance, and minimize the chances of time being lost in search of the instrument. It is immaterial for the moment whether the helpers are called by bell outside a fire-station: by by a messenger from some special messenger service, by a call through a telephone, or by an electric or automatic appliance. Any instrument will do that ensures the call being transmitted with maximum speed and certainty and in full accord with the requirements of the locality.
Outside Help. - Organized outside help may not be limited simply to the attendance of the fire brigade. Special arrangements can be made for the attendance of the local police force, a public or private salvage corps, an ambulance, or, in some cases, a military guard. Then in some instances arrangements are made for the attendance of the water and gas companies' servants, and even officials from the public works office, insurance surveyors, and the Press. There are places where the salvage corps arrives on the scene almost simultaneously with the fire brigade, and others where the police are generally on the spot in good force five minutes after the arrival of the first engines. There are several cities where the ambulance wagon and the steamers arrive together, and another city where the military authorities always send a fire piquet which can be turned out in a few minutes.
If all these helpers come together, no matter how high the rank of the individual commanders, the senior officer of the fire brigade, even if he holds only non-commissioned officer's rank, should have control, and his authority be fully recognized. Unfortunately, there are not many countries where this is the case. The efficiency of outside help depends in the first instance on the clear definition of the duties and powers of all concerned - on the legal foundation, in fact; then on the organization, the theoretically as well as practically correct executive; and, last, but by no means least, on the prestige, the social standing, the education of commanders and their ability to handle men. Among the rank and file of the brigade, clear-headedness, pluck, smartness and agility will be as invaluable as reckless daredevilry; showy acrobatism, or an unhealthy ambition for public applause, will be dangerous.
Research
Under the heading "Fire Research" should be included theoretical and experimental investigation as to materials and construction, combined with the chronicling of practical experience in fires, then the careful investigation and chronicling of the causes of fires, assisted where necessary by a power for holding fire inquests in interesting, suspicious or fatal cases. Experimental investigation as to natural and accidental causes as distinct from criminal causes can be included. Research in criminal cases may be assisted not only by a fire inquest, but also by immediate formal inquiries held on the spot, by the senior fire brigade and police officers present, or by immediate government investigations held on the same lines as inquiries into explosions and railway accidents.' As to general research work, there are several cities which contribute substantially towards the costs of fire tests at independent testing stations. Some towns also have special commissions of experts who visit all big fires occurring within easy travelling distance, take photographs and sketches, and issue reports as to how the materials were affected. Then there are the usual statistics as to outbreaks, their recurrence and causes, and in some places such tables are supplemented by reports on experiments with oil lamps, their burners and wicks, electric wiring, and the like.
The British Fire Prevention Committee
The British Fire Prevention Committee is an organization founded a few days after the great Cripplegate (London) fire in 1897, and incorporated in February 1899. It comprises some 500 members and subscribers. The members include civil engineers, public officials holding government appointments, fire chiefs, insurance surveyors and architects, whilst the subscribers in the main include the great public departments, such as the admiralty and war office, and municipalities, such as the important corporations of Glasgow, Liverpool and the like. Colonial government departments and municipalities are also on the roll, together with a certain number of colonial members. New Zealand has formed a special section having its own local honorary secretary. The ordinary work of the committee is carried out by a council and an executive, and the necessary funds are provided by the subscription of members and subscribers. The services of the members of council and executive are given gratuitously, no out-of-pocket expenses of any kind being refunded. Whilst the routine work deals mainly with questions of regulations, rules and publications of general technical interest, the tests are probably what have brought the committee into prominence and given it an international reputation. They are not only the recognized fire tests of Great Britain, but they rank as universal standard tests for the whole of the civilized world, and Americans, just as much as Danes, Germans or Austrians, pride themselves when some product of their country has passed the official procedure of a test by the committee. The reports of the tests, which state facts only without giving criticisms or recommendations, are much appreciated by all who have the control of public works or the specification of appliances. The committee does not limit itself solely to testing proprietary forms of construction or appliances, but has a number of tests - quite equal to the proprietary tests - of articles in general use. The ordinary concrete floor or the ordinary wooden joist floor protected by asbestos boards or slag wool receives as much attention as a patent floor; 1 In the United States a special officer called a "fire-marshal" has for some time been allocated to this work in many cities, and in 1894 state fire-marshals were authorized in Massachusetts and in Maryland, this example being followed by Ohio (1900), Connecticut (1901), and Washington (1902); and in other states laws have been passed making official inquiry compulsory. In England the question has been mooted whether coroners, even where no death has occurred, should hold similar inquiries, but though this has been done in recent years in the City of London no regular system exists.
| COST ] | and similarly the ordinary everyday hydrant receives equal attention with the patent hydrant, or ordinary bucket of water with the special fire extinguisher. The door tests of the committee, which cover some thirty different types of doors, deal with no less than twenty ordinary wooden doors that can be made by any ordinary builder or cabinet-maker. These so-called non-proprietary tests are made at the expense of the general funds of the committee, whilst for the proprietary tests the owners have to pay about two-thirds of the expenses incurred in the form of a testing fee. The expenses incurred in a test, of course, not only comprise the actual testing operation of testing, but also the expense of producing the report, which is always a very highly finished publication with excellent blocks. The expense incurred also includes the establishment expenses of the testing station at Regent's Park. The British Fire Prevention Committee organized the great Fire Exhibition and International Fire Congress of London in 1903, in both of which it enjoyed the support and assistance of the National Fire Brigades Union and the Association of Professional Fire Chiefs. It from time to time despatches special commissions to the continent of Europe, and these visits are followed by the issue of official reports, well illustrated, presenting the appliances, rules and methods of the countries visited, and serving as most useful reference publications. Taken generally, the whole of the work of the committee, both in respect of scientific investigations and propagandism, has been most beneficial. Fire waste has been materially reduced, regardless of the fact of the greater fire hazards and the ever-growing amount of property. In Great Britain alone the sum saved in fire wastage annually is about 5,000,000. This great annual saving has been obtained at an expenditure in research work, as far as the British Fire Prevention Committee is concerned, of about £23,000, of which more than half was provided by the membership in voluntary contributions or subscriptions. There is no similar institution anywhere in the world, although several government laboratories occasionally undertake fire tests, notably the Gross Lichterfelde laboratory near Berlin, and several insurance corporations have testing plants, notably the American Underwriters at Chicago. The efforts at research work outside Great Britain have, however, been spasmodic and in no way compare with the systematic series of inquiries conducted without any substantial state aid in London. Distribution of Losses. - Property destroyed by fire is practically an absolute loss. This loss may actually only affect the owner, or it may be distributed among a number of people, who are taxed for it in the form of a contribution to their national or local fire fund, a share in some mutual insurance "ring," or the more usual insurance companies' premium. In the first two cases some expenses have also to be met in connexion with the management of the fund, "tariff" organization, or "ring." In the last case, not only the expenses of management have to be covered, but also the costs incurred in running the insurance enterprise as such, and then a further amount for division amongst those who share the risk of the venture - namely, the insurance company's shareholders. It is well to distinguish between loss and mere expenditure. The sinking fund of the large property owner should cover a loss with a minimum extra expense; insurance in an extravagantly managed company paying large dividends will cover a loss, but with an unnecessarily large extra outlay. In every case the loss remains; and as property may always be considered part of the community, the province or nation, as the case may be, suffers. It is always in the interest of a nation to minimize its national losses, no matter whether they fall on one:individual's shoulders or on many, and whether such losses are good for certain trades or not. With a suitable system of fire protection it is possible to bring these losses to a minimum, but this minimum would probably only be reached by an extra expense, which would fall heavier on the insurers' pockets in the form of municipal rates than the higher premium for the greater risk. A practical minimum is all that can be attempted, and that practical minimum varies according to circumstances. Practical protection must mean smaller annual insurance dues, and the actual extra cost of this protection should be something less than the saving off these dues. Then not only has the nation a smaller dead loss, but the owner also has a smaller annual expenditure for his combined contributions toward the losses, the management of his insurance, and the protective measures. Where there is mutual insurance or municipal insurance in its best sense, the losses by fire and the costs of the protection are often booked in one account, and the better protection up to a certain point should mean a smaller individual annual share. Where there is company insurance the municipal rates are increased to cover the cost of extra protection, while a proportionate decrease is expected in the insurance premiums. Competition and public opinion generally impose this decrease of the insurance rates as soon as there is a greater immunity from fire. Where the insurance companies are well managed and the shareholders are satisfied with reasonable .dividends, practical protection can be said to find favour with all concerned, but if the protection is arranged for and the companies do not moderate their charges accordingly, the reverse is the case. The position of insurance companies subscribing towards the maintenance of a fire brigade should here be referred to, as there is considerable misunderstanding on the subject. The argument which municipalities or fire brigade organizations often use is to the effect that the insurance companies derive all the profit from a good fire service, and should contribute towards its cost. Where properly managed companies have the business, a better fire service, however, means a smaller premium to the ratepayer. If the ratepayer has to pay for extra protection in the form of an increased municipal rate, or in the form of an increased premium raised to meet the contribution levied, this is simply juggling with figures. CostAs to the cost of a practical system of fire protection, better and safer building from the fire point of view means better and more valuable structures of longer life from the economic aspect. Such better and safer constructional work pays for itself and cannot be considered in the light of an extra tax on the building owner. The compilation and administration of the fire protective clauses in a Building Act would be attended to by the same executive authorities as would in any case superintend general structural matters, and the additional work would at ,the most require some increased clerical aid. If the execution of the fire survey regulations were delegated to the same authority there would again simply be some extra clerical aid to pay for, and the salaries of perhaps a few extra surveyors. To make the inspections thoroughly efficient, it has been found advisable in several instances to form parties of three for the rounds. The second man would, in this case, be a fire brigade officer, and the third probably a master chimney-sweep, who would have to receive a special retaining fee. The cost of the public training referred to would be small, as the elementary part would simply be included in the schoolmaster's work, and the Press matters could be easily managed in the fire brigade office. Payments would have only to be made for advertisements, such as the official warnings, lists for firecall points, &c., and perhaps for the publication of semi-official hints. Self-help, as far as inspection and drills for amateurs are concerned would be under the control of the fire brigade. There would, however, be an extra expense for the purchase and maintenance of the street first-aid appliances referred to. The most expensive items in the system of fire protection undoubtedly come under the headings "Fire-Call" and "Fire Brigade." As to the former, there are a number of cities where the cost is modified by having the whole of the electrical service for the police force, the ambulance and fire brigade, managed by a separate department. The same wires call up each of these services, and, as the same staff attend to their maintenance, the fire protection of a city need only be debited with perhaps a third of the outlay it would occasion if managed independently. The combined system has also the great advantage of facilitating the mutual working of the different services in case of an emergency. The indicators which have been referred to involve an outlay; but here again, if the three services work together, the expenses on the count of fire protection can be lessened. The money rewards given in some cities to the individuals who first call the fire-engines may become a heavy item. Their utility is doubtful, and they have formed an inducement for arson. As to the outlay on fire brigade establishment, a strong active force should be provided, supported by efficient reserves. The latter should be as inexpensive as possible, but should at least constitute a part-paid and disciplined body which could be easily called in for emergencies. Fire brigade budgets cannot allow for an active force being ready for such coincidences as an unusual number of large fires starting simultaneously, but they must allow for an ample strength always being forthcoming for the ordinary emergencies, and this with all due consideration for men's rest and possible sickness. An undermanned fire brigade is an anomaly which is generally fatal, not only to the property owner, but also to the whole efficiency and esprit of the force. The budget must also allow for an attractive rate of pay, as the profession is one which requires men who have a maximum of the sterling qualities which we look for in the pick of a nation. It must also not be forgotten that the fire service is one of the few where a system of pensions is the only fair way of recognizing the risks of limb and health, and at the same time securing that stability in which practical experience from long service is so essential a factor. The budget must allow for an ample reserve of appliances. Whether or not a fire brigade should be so strong as to permit of its having a separate section for salvage corps purposes depends on circumstances. Economically a salvage corps is required, and should be part and parcel of the municipal brigade and organized on the same lines with a reserve, no matter whether the insurance of the locality be managed by the authorities or by companies. If a corps is necessary, it matters little whether it be paid for out of premiums or out of rates. Of further expenses which have to be considered, there are items for fire research and fire inquest. If managed economically, due confidence being placed in the opinions of the fire officers and surveyors, there is no reason why the outlay should be great. The statistical work would only require some clerical aid. Where special coroners are retained for criminal cases some extra money will of course be required; but even here the costs need not be excessive, as there are many retired fire brigade officers and fire surveyors who are well suited for the work, and would be satisfied with a small emolument. As to the cost of the water supply, there are but few places where special fire high-pressure mains are laid on in the interests of fire protection. As a rule the costs which are debited to the heading "Fire Protection" have simply to cover the maintenance of hydrants and tablets, or at the most the cost of the water actually used for fire-extinguishing purposes. Sometimes the cost of hydrants is shared with the scavenging department or the commission of sewers, which also have the use of them. Where the provision of water and hydrants falls to a private water company, the property owners will be paying their share for them, indirectly, in the form of water rates. The protective measures referred to will serve both for lifesaving and for the protection of property. It should be remembered that a good staircase and a ladder are often as useful for the manoeuvring of the firemen as for life-saving purposes, and that they are practically as essential for the saving of property as for saving life. No distinction need be made between the two risks when speaking of fire protection in general; but as the safety of the most valueless life is generally classed higher than that of the most valuable property, it may be well to give life-saving the first place when alluding to the two separately. Criminal fire-raising only prevails where the fire-protective system is defective. With good construction and a fire survey, the quick arrival of the firemen, and careful inquests, the risks of detection are as a rule far too great to encourage its growth. Saving of Life. - Under "Fire Prevention" special requirements in the Building Act can greatly influence the safety of life by requiring practical exits and sufficient staircase accommodation. The risks in theatres and assembly halls require separate legislation. In ordinary structures no inmate of a building should be more than sixty feet away from a staircase, and preferably there should be two staircases at his disposal in the event of one being blocked. Generally, attention is only given to the construction of staircases; but it must be pointed out that their ventilation is equally important. Smoke is even a greater danger than fire, and may hamper the helpers terribly. The possibility of opening a window has saved many a life. Safety of PropertyAs far as the protection of property is concerned, the prevention of outbreaks can be influenced by the careful construction of flues, hearths, stoves, and in certain classes of buildings by the construction of floors and ceilings, the arrangement of skylights, shutters and lightning conductors. Then comes the prevention of the fire spreading, first, by the division of risks, and secondly, by the materials used in construction. The legislator's first ambition must be to prevent a fire in one house from spreading to another, and a stranger's property, so to say, from being endangered. This is quite possible, given good party walls carried well over the roof to a height regulated by the nature of the risk, the provision of the shutters to windows where necessary, and the use of fire-resisting glass. Again, a thoroughly good roof - or still better, a fire-resisting attic floor - can do much. If the locality has a fire brigade and the force is efficiently handled, "spreads" from one house to another should never occur. Narrow thoroughfares and courts are, however, a source of danger which may baffle all efforts to localize a fire. This should be remembered by those responsible for street improvements. The division of a building or large "risk" into a number of minor ones is only possible to a certain extent. There is no need to spend enormous sums to make each of the minor "risks" impregnable. The desire should be simply to try to retard the spread for a certain limited time after the flames have really taken hold of the contents. In those minutes most fires will have been discovered, and, where there is an efficient fireextinguishing establishment, a sufficient number of firemen can be on the spot to localize the outbreak and prevent the conflagration from becoming a big one. In the drawing-room of an ordinary well-built house, for example, if the joists are strong and the boards grooved, if some light pugging be used and the plastering properly done, if the doors are made well-fitting and fairly strong, a very considerable amount of furniture and fittings can remain well alight for half an hour before there is a spread. In a warehouse or factory "risk" the same holds good. With well-built wooden floors, thickly pugged, and the ceilings perhaps run on wire netting or on metal instead of on laths, with ordinary double ledged doors safely hung, at the most perhaps lined with sheet iron or asbestos cloth, a very stiff blaze can be imprisoned for a considerable time. Many of the recent forms of "patent" flooring are exceedingly useful for the division of "risks," and with their aid a fire can be limited to an individual storey of a building, but it should not be forgotten that even the best of flooring is useless if carried by unprotected iron girders supported, say, by some light framing or weak partition. The general mistake made in using expensive iron and concrete construction is the tendency to allow some breach to be made (for lifts, shafting, &c.), through which the fire spreads, or to forget that the protection of the supports and girder-work requires most careful attention. Of the various systems of "patent" flooring, as a rule the simpler forms are the more satisfactory. It should, however, always be remembered that any specific form of flooring alone does not prevent a fire breaking from one "risk" to another. They should go hand in hand with general good construction, and naked ironwork must be non-existent. Some of the modern fire-resisting floors are too expensive to permit their introduction for fire protection alone. In considering their introduction, the general advantages which they afford as to spans, thickness, general stability, &c., should be taken into account. A practical installation of floors, partitions, doors, &c., should, first, not increase the cost of a building more than 5%, and secondly should add to the general value of the structure by giving it a more substantial character. The danger of lift wells, skylights and shaft openings should not be forgotten. The last should be as small as possible, well armed with shutters, the skylights should have fire-resisting glass, and the lifts not only vertical doors, but also horizontal flaps, cutting up the well into sections. The question of light partitions must also not be neglected. Division of "risks," common-sense construction, and proper staircase accommodation are really all that fire protection requires, and where the special Building Act clauses have been kept within the lines indicated, there has been little friction and discontent. It is only as a rule when the authorities are eccentric in their demands that the building owner considers himself harassed by protective measures. Fire survey regulations should mainly aim at preventing the actual outbreak of fire. In certain classes of risks fire survey can also increase the personal safety of the inmates and lessen the possibility of a fire spreading. The provision of fire-escapes or ladders, and a regular inspection of their efficiency, will do much. The examination of a rusty door-catch may save a building. The actual preventive work of the surveyor will, however, mostly consist in warning property owners against temporary stoves standing on ordinary floor boards, sooty chimneys, badly hung lamps, dangerous burners and gas brackets fixed in risky positions. Self-help will be greatly facilitated by the judicious arrangement of fire-extinguishing gear, and a like inspection of its efficiency. Hydrants and cocks must not rust, nor must the hose get so stiff that the water cannot pass through it, or sprinklers choked. Hand pumps and pails must always stand ready filled. One of the greatest errors generally made in distributing such apparatus is disregard of the fact that the amateur likes to have an easy retreat if his efforts are unsuccessful, and if this is not the case, he may not, perhaps, use the gear at all. With regard to regulations governing "special risks," so far as the safety of the public in theatres and public assembly halls is concerned, attention should be chiefly given to the exits. Spread of fire, and even its outbreak, are secondary considerations. A panic caused by the suspicion of a fire can be quite as fatal as that caused by the actual start of a conflagration. In the storage of petroleum in shops, direct communication should be prevented between the shop or cellar and the main staircase or the living rooms. The sale of dangerous lamps and burners should be prohibited. Fire - resisting MaterialsOne of the greatest misnomers in connexion with fire prevention was originally the description of certain materials and systems of construction as being "fireproof." This has seriously affected the development of the movement towards fire prevention, for, having regard to the fact that nothing described as "fire-proof" could be fire-proof in the true sense, confidence was lost in everything so described, and in fact everything described as "fire-proof" came to be looked on with suspicion. In order to decrease this suspicion and obtain a better understanding on the subject, the International Fire Prevention Congress of London in 1903, at which some Boo representatives of government departments and municipalities were present, discussed this matter at considerable length, and they arrived at conclusions which, in consideration of their importance in affecting the whole development of fireresisting construction, are published below. It is the classification of fire resistance adopted by this congress in 1903 that has been utilized by all concerned throughout the British empire, and in numerous other countries, since that date. The resolutions adopted by the congress embodied the recommendations contained in the following statement issued by the British Fire Prevention Committee: The executive of the British Fire Prevention Committee having given their careful consideration to the common misuse of the term " fire-proof," now indiscriminately and often most unsuitably applied to many building materials and systems of building construction in use in Great Britain, have come to the conclusion that the avoidance of this term in general business, technical, and legislative vocabulary is essential. The executive consider the term "fire-resisting" more applicable for general use, and that it more correctly describes the varying qualities of different materials and systems of construction intended to resist the effect of fire for shorter or longer periods, at high or low temperatures, as the case may be, and they advocate the general adoption of this term in place of "fire-proof." Further, the executive, fully realizing the great variations in the fire-resisting qualities of materials and systems of construction, consider that the public, the professions concerned, and likewise the authorities controlling building operations, should clearly discriminate between the amount of protection obtainable or, in fact, requisite for different classes of property. For instance, the city warehouse filled with highly inflammable goods of great weight requires very different protection from the tenement house of the suburbs. The executive are desirous of discriminating between fire-resisting materials and systems of construction affording temporary protection, partial protection, and full protection against fire, and to classify all building materials and systems of construction under these three headings. The exact and definite limit of these three classes is based on the experience obtained from numerous investigations and tests, combined with the experience obtained from actual fires, and after due consideration of the limitations of building practice and the question of cost. The executive's minimum requirements of fire-resistance for building materials systems of construction will be seen from the standard tables appended for I. Fire-resisting floors and ceilings, II. Fire-resisting partitions, III. Fire-resisting doors, but they could be popularly summarized as follows: (a) That temporary protection implies resistance against fire for at least three-quarters of an hour. (b) That partial protection implies resistance against a fierce fire for at least one hour and a half. (c) That full protection implies resistance against a fierce fire for at least two hours and a half. The conditions under this resistance should be obtainable, the actual minimum temperatures, thickness, questions of load, and the application of water can be appreciated from the annexed tables by all technically interested, but for the popular discrimination - which the executive are desirous of encouraging - the time standard alone should suffice. It is desirable that these standards become the universal standards in this country, on the continent and in the United States, so that the same standardization may in future be common to all countries, and the preliminary arrangements for this universal standardization are already in hand.
|
