The Portland daily press., 1871-01-12
DAILY PRESS,
PORTLAND.
THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 1871.


| French Roofs and Insurance,
The report of the New York Board of Un-
derwriters on French roofs, made in Novem-
Der last, we find transferred to the New Eng
| land Insurance Gazette of December. The
subject matter of this report is important in
this latitude. After referring to the changes
in the building law of New York which prac-
tically repeals the regulation requiring fire.
proof cutters and cornices and brick partition
walls rising above the roof, the report goes on
TO discuss the increased danger from fire
which the Mansard roof affords, when con-
structed in the ordinary way:
"When we take into consideration the fact
that the majority of these roofs are nIaced
upon buildings which from the sidewalk tn
the top of the corpice are from sixty to nine.
ty feet high, and which buildings, under the
other very salutary provisions of the law re-
lating to the erection of buildings to which we
have referred, are required to have heavy d.
vision walls, and otherwise rendered massive
and nearly fre-proof, it would seem to be an
absurdity, were it not serious matter, to al
low to be placed on such structures another
building, built of pine or other light wood,
covered with slate, or, worse still, corrugated
iron and from want of copings to the face OF
the division walls, to expose not only the
building itself, but its neighbors on either side
to destruction, as no barrier of either kind
would exist to prevent the exteasion of fire.
There are two instances OF buildings in this
city otherwise fire-proof, having iron beams
throughOut, which have upon them wooden
Mansard roofs.
Those who are familiar with the construc-
tinnsOf MansatH roofs in Paris where fbev
originated, know that it is required. in ali
cases, that the walls should extend above the
harizontal, and also the slope of the roof. and
never allowed to be used in Their cos1Se Mo91 Is
ton, except for the inner plankng. The
plea that has been put forth that coping such
walls destroys the architectural beauty Of the
buildings, can be most fully refuted by exam
lining such buildings as the National Park
Bank, Equitable LIE Assurance Co., New
York Herald, No. % Wiite Street, and Others.
There is no question in the minds of youI
Committee that false economy has had
more to do with this fimsy class of structures
than anything else, good architectural effects
being secured at the expense of safety, and by
endangering all surrounding property. 1t IS
known that in that part of the city where our
largest warehouses are located, there are al
ready not less than $50 buildings having these
wooden Mansard roofs, and they are constant
~ luCtC1oiuS, duu dkuOuS DWELLINGS IDaL can |
be counted by hundreds, nearly all the dwell
lings in the newly-built parts of the city being
ornamented with them.
We referred to the fact that not only were
our stores, dwellings and hotels fast being
converted on their tops into huge tinder box
es, but that our asylums. hospitals, halls and
other public buildings were also being sur
mounted by these structures Not only have
Nansard roofs found favor in this city, but in
the neighboring city OF Brooklyn, as well as
in Boston, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Cleveland.
Newark, Hartford, Chicago and other large
places. The recent disastrous fire in Chicago
accelerated and increased, among other caus-
es by three-story frame Mansard roof f1ay II
taught us lesson OF what we may expect
from the recurrence of disasters in any of the
places just named; lacking as most of them
are, in the means of coping with the dangers
these roofs bring with them. In none OF |
these cities, as far as we can learn, are there
any of these roofs that can be called safe
while in Boston, Chicago or Portland there /
are blocks and ranges of buildings extending
many hundred feet without visible breaks in L
the walls. Franklin and Devonshre streets,
Boston, are notable examples of this class OF
defective buildings in region where millions i
of dollars of valuable property are exposed to /
loss by single fire. New York Underwriters
are all more or less interested in these sister 1
cities, and how can they exclaim against the /
insecurity of buildings in them if they do not i
first set their own houses in order. In no 1
city of the Union are the laws relative to l
building so salutary and valuable as in our
own, and this has been owing TO the persist.
ent efforts of this Board, by judicious amend !
ments from time to time to perfect them.
Surely it is as important to protect ourselves i
against this class of incendiaries as any other, L
and no one who has witnessed the dire re
suits from confagrations such as New York,
in 1845, and Portland, in 1866, would desire a
w0fffddt nbrfhgt fnevitaDle natfn
number of the Insurance Companies of the l
United States, and yet this is what Under /
writers are doing by encouraging these agents,
which, by their height, are out of the reach OF 1
ordinary means for extinguishing fire, and at. /
ford wonderful facilities for the indefinite ex.
tension of confagration.
From what has been stated it must be
evident to all the members of the New York
Board, that their only safety lies in radical
reformation of the law relative to the con-
struction of this important part of buildings
in New York and elsewhere. 1t has been
sufficiently demonstrated in the erection Of
really first class buildings, such as those to
which we have referred, as well as many 9th.
ers and there is no necessity for our city los
ing these really handsome additions to our
architecture, which aforp a pleasant relief to
the uniform straight lines upon which our
buildings have been for so many years con.
structed. The quaint old Dutch gables of
our Knickebocker grandfathers, and the DOR
mer window Of our fathers were in their way
relief to the eye, inelegant as they certainly
were; but with proper restrictions we can re-
tain this new style Of architecture. and with |
out its being prejudicial to the interests of
Underwriters.
The report suggests the following amend
ments to the building law Of New York:
provided that where Mansard roofs are
placed on dwellings where the roof is not
over 70 feet in height, the castings, frames,
ratings and sheathing may be of wood; pro-
vided, in all cases, the coping on the face of
the roof is not less than IL inches in depth.
but in all cases, division walls must be carried
through the roof and coped in the usual sway.
On all other buildings, the castings, frames,
rafters and backing OF the Mansard roofs must
be of iron or other heavy metal; copings to
all walls to extend through the roof at least
~ inches.
A Corn AGE0US AND EATTUETrT WOMAN