Evening star., 1928-12-18
FIRE ESCAPE FIGHT
REVIVED BY DEATH
Question of Safety Appliance
Brought Under Spotlight
bye Street Tragedy.

The fire at 201 C street Sunday night
resulted today In second death, and
at the same time revived an old CAM
paign to amend the District fire escape
law by including rooming and board
ing houses among the establishments
required to be equipped with fire es-
capes.
The victim today was 9-year-old
Franklin Donohue. His mother, Mrs.
Sadie Donohue, and William Earl Gold
smith, who was known at the G street
house as Earl Donohue, are in serious
condition, the former in Emergency
Hospital, where the boy died this morn
ing, and the latter at Casualty. Mrs.
! Donohue's condition is so critical that
she has not been told of the death, of
her son.
Fire Escape Law Quoted.
The fire escape law 'enacted by Con-
gress in 1906, and amended in 1907,
provides that all buildings three stories
or more in height or more than 80 feet
high used or intended for use as a
tenement house, apartment house, nat,
hotel, hospital, seminary, academy,
school, college, institute, dormitory,
asylum, sanitarium, hall or place OF
amusement" shall be equipped with one
or more fire escapes of type and con-
Struction to be determined by the Dis
| trict Commissioners.
The question of whether boarding or
rooming houses should be included in
the scope of the law quickly came up
for decision, and on october 10, 1907,
E. H. Thomas, then corporation counsel,
ruled that they should not.
"The answer depends on whether
the definition of the word tenement
house apartment house. or fiat as
use in section of the act cover a
boarding house" Mr.. Thomas wrote.
He then quoted legal definitions of the
four words and concluded that 'the or
binary meaning of the term boarding
house is distinguishable from other
buildings known as tenement houses,
apartment houses or flats"
Opinion Amplified.
EFT remains to be considered" he
wrote. whether the legislation on the
subject of fire escapes in the District
should be literally construed for the
purpose of embracing within its provl-
Sions all classes of buildings whenever It
is practical to do so, or whether 1t should
be construed in derogation of the rights
of private persons, in view OF the pen
alties and the taxation provided therein
in event of failure to comply with the
act. I assume that the act Is to De
strictly construed"
The question again bobbed up in 1920
and the Commissioners submitted II
again to the corporation counsel, then
Francis H. Stephens. Mr.. Stephens
ruled that "the obvious intent OF the
law was to protect people congregatlng
in the day time or sleeping at night
in numbers above the average TO be
found in dwellings. think lodging
house is perhaps a fiat, certainly It
is a 'dormitory' within the meaning of
the law"
With two contradictory opinions be-
fore him, John p Healey. then build
ing inspector. asked for more legal light
and Corporation Counsel Stephens wrote
second opinion holding that mot
every boarding nor every lodging house
should be required to erect fire escapes.
A great deal of latitude should be al
lowed the building inspector, in my
Judgment, on such a matter. A great
deal depends upon the size of the
building and the height above the
ground and the number of Sleepers.
The law should not be applied so as
to work hardship, but there should
be some reasonable requirements to
protect the safety of citizens"
Law Amendment Advocated.
Matters rested In this shape until a
fire at 638 Pennsylvania avenue on
March 25, 1924 The building was used
as rooming house. 1t was four stories
high, and about 20 persons were taken
from the upper stories by firemen. 1t
was not equipped with fire escapes.
Deputy Fire Marshal c. G. Achstetter
recommended that the fire escape law
be amended so as to include rooming
houses.
Accordingly an amendment was pre-
pared to include rooming houses, board
ing houses and any building where five
or more persons slept above the second
floor, except strictly private dwellings,
under the fire escape law. In some way
unexplained, however, this draft re-
manned pigeonholed until April 10, 1928,
never reaching the District Commits
Sioners.
Issue Again Delayed.
Then another case of requiring a
rooming house to install fire escapes
came to the attention of the building
inspectors Office and the old draft was
dug out. At the time, however. Build
ing Inspector John w. Oehmann was at
work making a revision of the entire
building code, and planned to await the
completion of his revision before again
urging enactment of the amendment to
the fire escape law Since the fire
escape law is an act OF Congress, Col.
Oehmann says, it can only be amended
by Congress, and its wording may not
be charged by revamping of the mu-
nicipal building code.
Sundays fire has again brought the
matter to official attention and Col.
Oehmann said today that he intends to
make strong effort to get the amend