The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-01-03
The above figures are twenty-five per cent
excess OF those Tor the year 1871.
Court OF Sessions.
TIE BUILDING QUESTION.

To THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD
Observing that the late fires in your city have
drawn public attention somewhat anxiously to.
ward the building laws, and have elected remarks
more or less unjust to the department in charge OF
their enforcement, as one OF the lawmakers Of the
last and coming Assembly it is perhaps appropriate
to recite somewhat OF the experience OF last ses.
sion in regard to it. IL will at least serve as
warning in the future, and also Illustrate the ab.
solute necessity Of entrusting the construction and
drafting of such laws only to experienced and com.
petent persons who have no political ends to gain
or private interests to subserve. had the honor
to be member OF the Assembly OF 1871, when q
comprehensive and careful building law had been
en- .cted under the auspices Of Mr.. Leander Beck,
builder and also member, and naturally
felt Interested in the subject and curious
to learn the particulars concerning improve
ments upon II and when. last session, Mr.. Haight
reform member, introduced bill 627, intended,
as we were assured by himself and corps of active
lobby members, to reform and amend the building
law In accordance with the best experience Of
architects and the public welfare, my interest In
creased. The bill was reported favoraby by the
Committee on Cities which was regarded as par
excellence the Reform Committee of the House, and
OF which that eminent refOrmer, Mr.. Hawkins, was
chairman, and who. as understand, still persists
In regrettng Its subsequent iate During its So
journ with the committee parties claiming to be in
some manner representatives Of the Builders
one John w. Marshall who, understood was q
discharged inspector OF The Department OF Build
ings, ana Messrs. Tostevin. Sexton and DollinGer
drawn. appeared at Albany and were very active
IN soliciting its passage. The bill was referred to
subcommittee OF the whole, of which l was q
member, and remOnstrances Of all the Insurance
companies OF the city, also from the architects,
the committee. Mr.. James N. Macgreaor. Saperin n
tendent OF the Department. OF Buildings, also ap.
peared before the committee In opposition to the bi
Although warmly defended and supported by it's
friends and their counsel the motives OF the trainers
and the wickedly stupid natu q OF the bill were rem
dered so apparent that the committee promptly
aud peremptOrily reported against IT, and tn. As
sembly concurred without dissent. The parties
were found to be merely nalcOntcnts opposed to
the department, and were not representatives Of
startled by series or fire disasters into or
the almost incacu able Importance OF some strin-
safety to life and property, will regard the pro-
visions OF that proposed law rs curious bit OF his
OF wn aae n
been opposed TO any law or Department OF Build
ngs. The bill was composed chiefly OF garbled ex-
some ignorant person, and the 1imsy pre-
tence OF building regulations was insufficient
ment Of buildings. Had 1t passed it would
merely have repealed the excellent provisions Of
because no builder could have understood II any
more tan the makers did. No authority was
granted 10 make surveys, enforce law or collect
penalties. Inspectors were required to be Skilled
mechanics but any one could be superintendent
or either OF five deputies, aud they had scarcely
more power than their clerks. or messengers The
only power proposed was vested In board Of arbi-
traitors, mutually chosen by delinquent property
owners and the department.. No law compelled
property owners to select arbitrators and no pro-
VISION was made to pay them; and, under such
law 10000 several boards OF arbitration would
have been required to decide questions OF violation
during the past decade. Not TO trespass upon
your space and patience, more vlciOusly absurd
law was never proposed. Ii consisted of forty
seven sections, which were carefully examined by
by the provisions eight inch walls were restored;
1t dispensed with the testing oil iron work and iron
shutters; restored wooden corniccs; omitted
fire escapes, ladders and scuttes to build
ings already erected; restricted the fire
limits again below Eighty-sixth street; per-
mitted the erection OF wooden buildings
thirty eight feet high anywhere In the city n COW
cred with 1reprooi material, and twelve feet high
without. In a word, the bill abolished all restric-
tons and was especially designed to subserve the
ambitious malcontents on the other. My impress
sion OF the present building law-and think 1t
was, also, the conclusion OF all who examined 1t
last sessi0n-is that lew amendments concerning
construction details and increased power OF en-
forcement to the department arc all the public in
tion of the department be what they may the build
ing details tie results OF ten years OF the labor
and experience OF the best architects among u.s.
AS one among many members OF the coming
Assembly, am willing to join my effort and iniiu-
ence In the attainment OF good code OF building
regulations and department fully empowered to
enforce them. JAMES NJ. OAKLEY.
JAMAICA, L..