New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-12-06

perfsct Greproof building devised or 'mae'neu
couId moi have wlthstood the Chicago hre IL
nIanted In its track. Here the Home Lie
buildlnc was much like a fireplace ana cni"-
new for the inflammable mass OF the sinane'
Rogers Peet g. Co. building. The court oi Tue
former made Hue into and up which the hish
wind blow the flames. With nrc on thc
hearth and holes all the way up the CHIMNEY
the woodwork In fhe upper rooms OF Il house
ore SIRE TO catch fire. And that was just Inc
situstion with the Home Life building III its
court which opened TO the Rogers, Peet * CO.
building. were many windows without iron
shutters and there were also side windows
looking ont Oh Rogers. Peet & Co.'S roof. VI
course with fire beneath them and wind dow
inc flames against them. the glass in these WIN
dows broke. window-frames and interior WOOD
work and furniture caught, and there was
enough heat developed to damage the SURFACE
OF the front walls There might have been
enough 10 warp Orders and seriously nlure
the structure. but that does not appear to nave
been the case.
One of the lessons Of the occurrence is tie
danger Of unprotected windows and sdclishts
In high freproof buildings when there Is
combustlble structure below them. Another Is
the powerlessness of any fire department 10
get an adequate water supply TO the top OF the
exaggeratedly lofty towers that have recently
been the fashion here. The Home Life build
ing had an apparatus Of It's own for this pur-
nose but il broke down under the strain ana
there was little 10 do but let the fire con-
sump all the comDustible material open to IL
and trust 10 the sOlidity Of the structure IT,
self That appears 10 have been hreproot IN
truth. for il stood the furnace heat without
md tho burning of woodwork within. Stul an
other lesson is the menace 10 the great build-
incs from the small old buildings which Jostie
them. II the Rogers, Peet & Co. building had
been 6reproof the defects of unprotected court
windows and side openings might have caused
no trouble The Home Life building was appar-
emily perfectly safe so far as 1t itself was con-
cerned The mistake Of its architect seems 20
have been in considering his building as the Only
one in existence and not thinking OF its rela-
lions 70 neichboring structures. Perhaps ne
never STONED 10 ask what was at the nortn OF
his plot except to find how many of his upper
stories could get north light.
Safety in our close.built cities is only TO be
had by considering not individual plots. Out
souares and tracts as a whole. Far too little
attention Is paid to this We see az every turn
high buildings put UP on the theory that they are
sufficient unto themselves and with utfer dlsr"-
gard 10 the fact that they are making furnace
fuos for the old buildings about them. 1hat
frnproof construction is OF value botn tor the
huiiding in which il is used and The general
safety is not TO be doubted. structure oulit
after thar fashion is practically immune 10 any
fire started within. II may be damaged Dy al
external fire. but even then. as was SHOWN on
Sunday night it IS a barrier 10 the progress ol
the flames Any other than hreproof ou'''-
ing south Of Rogers. Peet X Co.'S might nave
opened tho way TO a widespread connagra'loh'
But while freproof construction thus amply
ylndicates itself. the dangers OF side-openlnGs'
disregard of surroundings and excessive hel2At
in proportion 10 facilities for raising water are
made Enthusiastically clear.