The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-07-20
per cent on $535 to Pay the Fire Fiend

for them. AS we are beginning, howeva- /.
conserve our forest lands. we may coms
consider that the things ones hands H.
created may also be worth saving We :"
come to look with disfavor upon buildInss
excessive height and floor area without -
quate fire cut-offs. with huge floor opaniu7'
and unprotected windows. We may coms (
demand that the so-called freproof buIl@'1
shall be really freproof knowing that 49,
work, improperly insulated. will buckla + +
hot fire, even If the whole structure dos. =
collapse entirely.
In the rush into concrete building nov
dent, we may come to demand honest miI.r,-
OF cement, and the use OF sand sharn aro1@
to bind the concrete properly, instead AZ a
smooth water-worn pebbles that will aid b
crumbling and disintegrating process vnS~
the action OF heat and water We NAV a.
our folly IN making floors ten inches fbsS
and enclosing stairs and elevators In a wall
equal thickness TO prevent the spread al a.
from floor to floor, and then leave our yiudo~
protection to one-eighth inch window En-
when strong and fre-resistlng glass hsid 4
metal frames is available
A fire In the congested district of New pa
City, covering one-tenth of the area burned j1
the San Francisco confagration Of 1906 wcull
put every fire insurance company In the eoun
try out Of business. It Is we'll recognIrI
among expert fire protection engineers that n1
San Francisco catastrophe Baltimors an1
Chelsea fires may be duplicated any dsy K
New York City, provided fire starts IN d.
right place on a windy night The recent g.
In the Equitable Building came within an ac
Of causing a conhagration. the results OF vhIci
would have been terrible to conteYnphfo
There IS scarcely city In the United Stals|
which does not offer conditions ripe for d>
vastating fires.
If we compare the official figures shovinI
the actual property loss by fire IN the lareaI
n lint 81, rrJ;hSt a.
OF like number Of European cities possel1
ing about equal populations, we arriys
startling contrasts. For Instance Londm
England, with population Of 7.252.9sa had
property loss by fire amounting to s12S6,501|
a per capita loss of 80 cents New York Gu
With population Of 4,766S 1888, lost proper
valued at S10.582,330; a per capita loss OF S23<
Paris, France, with population OF 2S46a<
had a'property loss by fire aggresating s11N
723; per capita loss Of II cents ChicaH
Ill., With a population Of 2,lS5,2s3, suffered \
property loss OF se,O4s.9Oo; a per capita %
OF SZ,ae Berlin Germany, with popusa9
OF 2,064,l53, lost property valued at s303aA|
per capita loss Of IA cents. PHILADELPHIA
Pa. with population of 1,549,O0S, lost $3sl1
$50 OF property values by fire; a per capi1
loss OF SIZE. Dresden, Germany, with pop
!ation of 550,SS2, suffered property loss
s68,324; per capita loss OF II cents. Bostc1
Mass, with a population Of 6705S5, lost pfvl
erty valued at s3,451,3 ,318; a per capita loss
S514
Leeds England with a population of 43o,Ss
lost property valued at S1S2, $50; per capt
loss OF az cents. Pittsburgh. Pr, with pop
lation OF 53S.905, had a property loss Of ss7l|
253; per capita loss Of s1.S3 These instanc9
are by no means EXCEPTIONAL; they represd'
good general averages
What tremendous drain this annual ~
waste Is upon our resources, national munlc
pal and individual! 1t Is sapping the strens1
OF the nation, The question Is, does II pay 1
the long run? If not can the community
that it may set to work In earnest to put G
house In order by preventing what is prevent
BILE and eliminating dangerous fire hazsraI
which should never be allowed to existf