The Washington times., 1906-04-08
F|RE-ESCAPE LAW
VERY UNPOPULAR
Regarded AS Too Drastic In
Its Provisions.
WILL RESTRICT BUILDING
Inducement to Construct Cheaper Class
of Structures Because of the
Requirement.
WILL RESTRICT BUILDING

requirement.
Agitation continues against the drastic
character OF the recently enacted fire
escape law, which provides that build
ings over three stories or thirty feet
in height, whether freproof or not, must
be equipped with fire exits and escapes.
Criticism of the new law has by no
means simmered into a passive accept
ance, and many outspoken references
are heard concerning the rapidity with
which the measure was passed by Con-
gress without first having tested local
sentiment as to its desirability. Its en-
forcement, il Is believed by some, will
materially restrict building operations in
the District. In this connection Presi-
dent James +. Oyster, OF the Business
Mems Association, displayed consider
able feeling at a meeting of the asso-
citation Thursday night in saying that
he considered il the duty of the Dis
trict Committee in Congress to give the
business men Of the community a chance
20 express their views on all laws of
such vital interest before they were en-
acted He said that, although opposi-
ton to the 1re-escape law at this time
was somewhat belated, people in the
District whose interests were affected
were not disposed to regard it as a wise
measure, and no doubt steps would be
taken at an early date looking to its
modification In voicing this sentiment
President Oyster had the unanimous ap-
proval of his hearers
Repeal of Law Demanded.
e
the new law will develop into, or
whether it presages a move to secure
its repeal. is not predicted at this time
The fact OF its coming from one in close
touch with the various business inter
ests of the city, it has been suggested.
points to a concrete plan to secure re-
lief from the sweeping provisions of the
law
Two lines Of argument against the de-
STABILITY OF the law are advanced. One
is based on the decided objection made
by architect, NJ. J. HaIler, printed IN a
recent isuc of The Times In substance
that the erection Of disfiguring frees
Capes on buildings viii necessarily spoil
the architectural plan of the structure
secured by the owner after considerab BILE
outlay of money. Another, and perhaps
more important. contention Is that the
provision Of the law requiring the erec-
tion Of fire-escapes on buildings where
tested fireproof materials have been
used throughout is devoid of the princi-
pie of Justice
Nay Be Taken Into Court.
This provision. it is argued. when its
effects are generally understood, will
cause widespread dissatisfaucc1. and
tempts 10 resist its too drastic charac-
ter by resort to the courts. In fact, an
illustration of this contention is
shown in the case of a wen-known build
er contemplating the erection OF several
houses In the northeast section. who has
delayed the operation until the status
of the new fire-escape law can be de-
termined- He told a Times representa-
tive recently that he intended to attack
the validity of the law, and felt GER
tain that the courts would uphold him
Some Decided Opinions.
AS a means of securing the public YER
dict TO the questionable value of the
new law. The Times has canvassed the
city and secured the views of g few
weII-known business men Some of these
opinions illuminate the subject consid-
erably.
In speaking OF the matter Robert E.
Bradley. the well-known real estate
dealer. referred to the Home Life and
Bond Office buildings as representatives
of that class and the Plaza and Cairo
as typical apartment houses, and stated
that as each of these are thoroughly
f1reproof in construction any fire that
might originate in them could do but
little damage, as the small amount OF
woodwork would furish but little oppor-
tunity for damage. He thought that II
was putting a great hardship on owners
who had already gone to great expense
to make their buildings as safe as hu-
man ingenuity could devise.
Charles A. Shields. who devotes him
self largely to property of the medium
class. could see no good reason for the
law, and was inclined to think that it
had been fostered by parties who would
be interested in its passage. While it
would not bear heavily on the people
whose interests he looked after, he was
Of opinion that the city would suffer
largely in its architectural appearance
by its enforcement Looking out at the
Willard Hotel Immediately opposite his
office he thought that to attach a series
Va iioAA microscopes MOulU enIlTely de-
face that beautiful structure without
compensatlng advantages.
Herbert A. Gill believes tIIat = at
tempt its enforcement would be TO re-
quire such large addition to the pres
ent high price of building that IL would
discourage investors and in that way
initiate against the city by the natural
reduction Of taxable values. Rather, he
he hull
should be encouraged in every way pos
sibie.
The general consensus of opinion was
10 the effect that the law was wrong in
essence and should never have been
passed