Page:EB1911 - Volume 04.djvu/789

 water-supply, and ventilation of buildings.” The noticeable feature of the New York regulations is that all master plumbers have to be registered, which is not so in England. The New York regulations have 183 sections relating to sanitary work, and the English regulations have 96 sections. Also by part 16 of the Amendments to Plumbing Rules 1903, the New York laws require that, before any construction of, or alterations to, any gas piping or fittings are commenced, permits must be obtained from the superintendent of buildings; these are only issued to a registered plumber. The application must be accompanied by plans of the different floors showing each outlet, and the number of burners to each outlet; a statement must also be made of the quality of the pipes and fittings, all of which are to be tested by the inspector. In London there are no such laws; the gas companies control a small portion of the work as regards the connexion to meters, while the insurance companies require gas jets to be covered with a wire guard where liable to come in contact with inflammable goods. As to water, the various water companies in England have each their own set of regulations as to the kind of fittings and thickness and quality of pipe to be used, whether for service, wastes or main.

The importance of fire-resisting construction is being more fully recognized now by all countries. In France the regulations for factories, shops and workshops relating to “exits” require that all doors should open outwardly when they open on to courts, vestibules, staircases or interior passages. When they give access to the open air, outward opening is not obligatory unless it has been judged necessary in the interests of safety. If the doors open on to a passage or staircase they must be fixed in such a manner as not to project into the passage or staircase when open. The exits must be numerous, and signs indicating the quickest way out are to be placed in conspicuous positions. The windows are to open outwardly. Staircases in offices or other buildings serving as places for work shall be constructed in incombustible materials, or shall be walled in fully in plaster. The number of staircases shall be in proportion to the number of employees, &c. It is prohibited to use any liquid emitting vapours inflammable under 35° C. for the purpose of lighting or heating, unless the apparatus containing the liquid is solidly closed during work, that part of the apparatus containing the liquid being so closed as to avoid any oozing out of the liquid, &c. &c. Instructions are added as to precautions to be taken in case of fire.

In London fire-resisting construction is dealt with in the London Building Act, and its second schedule, and in London County Council Theatre and Factory Acts, &c. In New York the building code (parts 19, 20 and 21) deals with fire appliances, escapes, and fire-proof shutters and doors, fire-proof buildings and fire-proof floors, and requires that all tenement houses shall have an iron ladder for escape. A section somewhat similar to the last came into force in London in 1907 under the London Building Act, being framed with a view to require all existing projecting one-storey shops to have a fire-resisting roof, and all existing buildings over 50 ft. in height to have means of escape to and from the roof in case of fire.

There are several patents now in use with which it would be possible to erect a fire-proof dwelling at small cost with walls 3 to 5 in. in thickness. One of these has been used where the building act does not apply, as in the case of the Newgate prison cells, London, where the outside walls were from 3 to 4 in. thick only, and were absolutely fire and burglar proof. This method consists in using steel dovetailed sheets fixed between small steel stanchions and plastered in cement on both sides. This form of construction was also used at the British pavilion, Paris Exhibition 1900, and has been employed in numerous other buildings in England, and also in South Africa, Venezuela, and India (Delhi durbar). The use of many of these convenient and sound forms of building construction for ordinary buildings in London, and in districts of England where the model by-laws are in force, is prohibited because they do not comply with some one or other of the various clauses relating to materials, or to the thickness of a wall.

The various details of construction are described and illustrated under separate headings. See, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , &c.

BUILDING SOCIETIES, the name given to societies “for the purpose of raising, by the subscriptions of the members, a stock or fund for making advances to members out of the funds of the society upon freehold, copyhold, or leasehold estate by way of mortgage,” may be “either terminating or permanent” (Building Societies Act 1874, § 13). A “terminating” society is one “which by its rules is to terminate at a fixed date, or when a result specified in its rules is attained”; a “permanent” society is one “which has not by its rules any such fixed date or specified result, at which it shall terminate” (§ 5). A more popular description of these societies would be—societies by means of which every man may become “his own landlord,” their main purpose being to collect together the small periodical subscriptions of a number of members, until each in his turn has been able to receive a sum sufficient to aid him materially in buying his dwelling-house. The origin and early history of these societies is not very clearly traceable. A mention of “building clubs” in Birmingham occurs in 1795; one is known to have been established by deed in the year 1809 at Greenwich; another is said to have been founded in 1825, under the auspices of the earl of Selkirk at Kirkcudbright in Scotland, and we learn (Scratchley, On Building Societies, p. 5) that similar societies in that kingdom adopted the title of “menages.”

United Kingdom.—When the Friendly Societies Act of 1834 gave effect to the wise and liberal policy of extending its benefits to societies for frugal investment, and generally to all associations having a similar legal object, several building societies were certified under it,—so many, indeed, that in 1836 a short act was passed confirming to them the privileges granted by the Friendly Societies Act, and according to them the additional privileges (very valuable at that time) of exemption from the usury laws, simplicity in forms of conveyance, power to reconvey by a mere endorsement under the hands of the trustees for the time being, and exemption from stamp duty. This act remained unaltered until 1874, when an act was passed at the instance of the building societies conferring upon them several other privileges, and relieving them of some disabilities and doubts, which had grown up from the judicial expositions of the act of 1836. It made future building societies incorporated bodies, and extended the privilege of incorporation to existing societies upon application, so that members and all who derive title through them were relieved from having to trace that title through the successive trustees of a society. It also gave a distinct declaration to the members of entire freedom from liability to pay anything beyond the arrears due from them at the time of winding up, or the amount actually secured by their mortgage deeds. Power to borrow money was also expressly given to the societies by the act, but upon two conditions: that the limitation of liability must be made known to the lender, by being printed on the acknowledgment for the loan, and that the borrowed money must not exceed two-thirds of the amount secured by mortgage from the members, or, in a terminating society, one year’s income from subscriptions. Previous to the passing of the act (or rather to the judicial decision in Laing v. Read, which the clause of the act made statutory) there had been, on the one hand, grave doubts on high legal authority whether a society could borrow money at all; while, on the other hand, many societies in order to raise funds carried on the business of deposit banks to an extent far exceeding the amounts used by them for their legitimate purpose of investment on mortgage. It enacted, that if a society borrowed more than the statute authorizes, the directors accepting the loan should be personally