The Sentinel=record., 1911-10-01
BETTER PREVENT
 THAN ID FIGHT
CHIEF cRokER, OF NEW YORK, MAKES INTERESTING TALK
 ON PROBLEM OF FIRES
Thinks Enormous Fire Waste Could Be CurtaiIed Largely By
 Proper Precaution.

how best to put them out, and pro- posal for the establishment by the government of a department to in- sure adequate protection against fires, were the subjects of an ad- dress delivered before the Intna- tfonal Municipal Congress by Eda ward F. Croker who for 12 years was chief of the fire department of New York city MT. Croker said in part:
 The enormous fire waste of the United States varies from $200,000,- 900 to $400,000,0OO annually, and the vastly greater indirect losses that result, seriously affect our economic and civic prbgress. The loss of lives by fire is one that cannot be realized save by Those unfortunates whose relatives and friends have been lost in many deplorable ealam- tiles. To be poetical it is nothing more than Slaughter of the In nocents.
 This utter destruction Of more than quarter of a billion of dol lars in property in addition to the lives incalculable in money value. is not an act of God nor one of the inevitable chances of industry ana commerce.
 'Let us apply the test of com parison with other countries of like civilization. In round numbers, the per capita fire loss in the United States has been from S2 to S4 against 3S cents in the principal European countries. One of the conditions in these countries that operates to affect a lesser loss than here is the larger use of non-com- bustible materials due to the high cost of wood. Another reason is the intangible influence of their old CT civilization, which makes these people more careful of small savings in all their affairs and generally more cautious than We have yet be- comeL
 Tt has been my observation that the large majority of fires arise from preyentable causes. In fact every fire of consequence is preyentable.
 The subject of fire prevention is vastly more important than that of fire fighting. When one conflagra- ton has been checked or prevent ed you have accomplished little. The chances for repetition tomorrow ar eequally as great.
 If we are to better conditions you must realize that 'fireproof' is not 'freproof as it is understood today am sincere in the conviction that inc government should make it heavily punishable offense to apply the term to anything but an abso- futely freproof building.
 There is but one principle to fire proof construction, be it either homes, hotels. office buildings, thea. tres, apartments. battleships, railway cars or whatever. To have fire proof buildings architects and own CTS must throw aside precedent and eliminate the use of combustiblc and semi-combustible materials in their construction.
 If l had my way about it I would not permit a piece os wood, even the size of lead pencil tc be used in the construction or eicish of any building in the United States exceeding a ground area of 25x50 feet or three stories in height. If there was still an ab- solute necessity for it's use. if we could find nothing to replace 1t, it would then be well to attempt to conceive of something better. I am opposed to the use of wood in any form in fireproof buildings and the law ought not to permit it's use. Wooden floors, wooden window frames, doors and casings burn and help other things to burn; wooden tri mand bases burn--everything that is made of wood burns and helps the fire to spread. Eliminate wood remove the cause and you have precluded the possibility of fires.
 We have no department of our government devoted 10 the matter of fire protection. Our laws on the subject are not specialized to com pletely cover any particular build ing or business, although they could be made broad enough in their gen eral application to go a great way toward partly solving the problem.
 "lt is my firm conviction that the United States government should establish department. founded somewhat on the lines Yf the pure food law, for the purpoA of estab- fishing laboratories whosH business