New-York tribune., 1913-07-27
ST. PAUL'S IN DANGER
OF TOTAL DESTRUCTION
Settling Walls and Unstable
Piers on Insecure Foundation
Threaten London Cathedral.
MAY BE CLOSED TO PUBLIC
Only the Utmost Care Will Pre-
serve Famous Building for
Even a Comparatively
Short Time.
From The Tribune Correspondent ]

IFrom The Tribune Correspondent-l
London. July l9-The recent ominols
cracking and settling OF the walls and
plers OF 81 Paurs Cathedral have led
IN very extensive study OF the famous
building by many well known arcnItec;'
and engineers. One result Of these n
yestigations has been 20 show that the
foundation was about as poor alone to
hold the tremendous weight OF masonry
as could have heen found any place n
England away from the sandy sea oeacn.
ST PauVs is. in fact, built or thin
laver OF potters clay everything about
TWENTY-FIVE feet OF sand and grave! n
strata OF varying thickness. and paFI
of this composite seems to be ql!cksani.
Al any rate, from the nature OF this
norton OF the subsoi every fresh mole
in the vicinity Of the cathedral means tne
slipuing away Of little more ot the
foundation OF the building. the qulckness
with which the undermining takes place
depending on the distance OF the e1caVa-
ton from the cathedral walls
Real Danger Of Destruction.
The ne, result OF building such greai
structure on a foundation OF this hin'
has been the gradual suosidence OF the
waus until the cathedral is now IN reA
danger OF destruction. In the first year
after the building was finished there "as
q very marked subsistence Of the walls
bu, this was ascr4bed az the time 70 tAs
settling which takes place IN a. new
buildings Since then, however. there hss
been q steady sinking OF the |a!!s' ana
in the last ten L1.rs II mas oeen so
marked that Il constitutes a menace OF
such importance that there has even oeen
I talk OF closing the building TO the puoHe'
. The dome now leans several Incnes 20 we
/ sor,bvest which would not be n itseli
cause for uneasiness were Il not FOR ne
fact that the building is not az resi- as
+ tho continual breaking OF cement tel
tales proves.
AID this leads to the criticisms on
yy.re,,s work that the investigations
have brought out. u has oeen lo-hn
that the whole superstructure Is AteF1"y
laced together with iron ties. and tAa'
/ the building ls so delicately poised talt
+ u IL were not for these ties II No--a
probably not be standing to-day Ho'
only IS the foundation almost the "oFs'
I that could be found. but the piers n
stead OF being solid masonry, are on.
thin shells OF Portland stone nIIed u
with rubble. and the header stones, Wh!ca
vsrs inserted 10 bind them togetne'
/ have snapped in settlement and nave
long since ceased 70 be OF any value
Huoe Dome Overburdens Piers.
Tn. weight o. III. dome on the top OF
I the piers is 5000 tons. wnicn means
pressure OF eleven tons foot over 'nsi
area. Even II the piers were OF so-'4
Portland stone they would have lo~-
~ the urni, that they could carry. sii
they are merely cased with Portahc
stone and the core is Eubole, which nas
d,s,ntsgra,ed. while the mortar 'ha'
Wren used has perished. AS matter q
fact these piers caused trouble as sooH
as The building was finished and ns"'
caused by the pressure had 70 oe r.
paired -
Wren has always been credited "l'A
beirg more daring architect than the
builders OF 81. Peters in Rome because
the area OF the pier supports 70 the con's
l or ~. Bdll : - I4ANAA ASS| N'NN--
case IN ST Peters, but Wren. through
/ lack OF knowledge OF design. lett '0'
small a margin OF safety IN his suppo'S
There is evidence that when ne o1'''
his foundations re intended 20 put eo'he
q, much less height and, therefore q
much less weight OF them IMAM
actually done. and when the design q
the dome was changed no change was
made In It's supports There Is dra"'ns
IN Wren's hand in the library AZ .
PauVs which shows that the dome as
originally planned consisted OF sins'e
wall TO support the drum instead OF 'ls
two walls which now support the clTcu's
peristyle This means. whatever the o1''
line OF the dome lighter supersTue''
ure.