Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-11-23
Cbeckiuu F,rcs Inv Exnlo.io,,..

General John Newton, of the United States
engineers, in a conversation with a Herald re-
porter, expressed himself as follows in regard
to this subject
81 think that either giant powder or dualin
would be the best agent to employ. They would
make no scatter, out if properly applied would
cut building off close to its foundations or
piers and let it fall"
care there any rules laid down in military
engineering for the guidance, say, of an officer
who occupies a city fired by an eyacuating enc
my to adm checking the confagration by blow
ing up buildings?"
"No, there are no rules on the subject no in
structions He would be guided solely by i'm
mediate judgment"
"What is the peculiar charac teristc of giant
powder in its effects as distinguished from gun.
powder,
"Well," responded the general, "giant pow
der is combination of nitro.glycerine and
earth oil peculiar kind. 1t is very powerful
when exploded, and acts on a more limited and
direct surface. Take, for example, an iron
pillar supporting a building. | would put a
ring of giant power around its base and eX-
plode it, and the explosion would cut that nil
lar of as clean as though cut with q knife If
II is wall that is to be destroyed, first pierce
the wall, and in the same way surround the
piers of masonry with the powder. 1t would
blow the wall OFF clean where the powder was
used and would let the upper part of the wall
fall vertically.
What, in brief would be your plan of des-
trOying a building2"
"Oh, | should simply pierce the walls so as to
leave piers of masonry or brckwork, and sur.
round these and all the pillars or other supports
OF the building, with giant powder. When that
was ignited the building would 20 down. The
piercing Of the walls would be matter easy of
accomplishment, but you would require work
men little familiar with 1.-The nature of the work
to be done. A few of our sappers would 90
around building like this, and pierce the walls
with their picks in very short time"
Would the blowing out of front row of
buildings be- under ordinary circumstances a
sufficient demolition?"
'No; should think not. The fire would be
apt to creep over the ruins, and, perhaps, ignite
the rear Of the rear row of buildings If snch a
remedy were resOrted 10 in the case of fire, if
would not do TO hesitate about saving house
or TWO. IL would never do TO blow out a front
row and run the risk of having the rear row of
buildings catch fire and burn the next block
The only safe plan would be to blow down
whole block to create the necessary gap to check
great Gre"
Would you in undertaking such a task blow
down all the buildings Of on entire block stimuli.
taneously, or with one discharge ??
well, no, not exactly" responded the gen.
eral. hat would be difficult, though not i'm.
poSslOle; but 1t would be at least unnecessary to
attempt so vast an instantaneous demolition,
and the danger, in time of so much excite
ment as great fire, would be much increased
Dy such course. No. | should blow down
one or two buildings at time. II would not
take great while to level block. Of course.
III adopting this blOwingup system of defense
against fire it would not do to commence TOO
near the actual scene of the fire Il would he
pest to blow down buildings a block, at least,
removed from the buildings actually on fire, so
that the work could bedone carefully and thor
oughly."