Page:EB1911 - Volume 10.djvu/422

 of a nation. It must also not be forgotten that the fire service is one of the few where a system of pensions is the only fair way of recognizing the risks of limb and health, and at the same time securing that stability in which practical experience from long service is so essential a factor. The budget must allow for an ample reserve of appliances.

Whether or not a fire brigade should be so strong as to permit of its having a separate section for salvage corps purposes depends on circumstances. Economically a salvage corps is required, and should be part and parcel of the municipal brigade and organized on the same lines with a reserve, no matter whether the insurance of the locality be managed by the authorities or by companies. If a corps is necessary, it matters little whether it be paid for out of premiums or out of rates.

Of further expenses which have to be considered, there are items for fire research and fire inquest. If managed economically, due confidence being placed in the opinions of the fire officers and surveyors, there is no reason why the outlay should be great. The statistical work would only require some clerical aid. Where special coroners are retained for criminal cases some extra money will of course be required; but even here the costs need not be excessive, as there are many retired fire brigade officers and fire surveyors who are well suited for the work, and would be satisfied with a small emolument.

As to the cost of the water supply, there are but few places where special fire high-pressure mains are laid on in the interests of fire protection. As a rule the costs which are debited to the heading “Fire Protection” have simply to cover the maintenance of hydrants and tablets, or at the most the cost of the water actually used for fire-extinguishing purposes. Sometimes the cost of hydrants is shared with the scavenging department or the commission of sewers, which also have the use of them. Where the provision of water and hydrants falls to a private water company, the property owners will be paying their share for them, indirectly, in the form of water rates.

The protective measures referred to will serve both for life-saving and for the protection of property. It should be remembered that a good staircase and a ladder are often as useful for the manœuvring of the firemen as for life-saving purposes, and that they are practically as essential for the saving of property as for saving life. No distinction need be made between the two risks when speaking of fire protection in general; but as the safety of the most valueless life is generally classed higher than that of the most valuable property, it may be well to give life-saving the first place when alluding to the two separately.

Criminal fire-raising only prevails where the fire-protective system is defective. With good construction and a fire survey, the quick arrival of the firemen, and careful inquests, the risks of detection are as a rule far too great to encourage its growth.

Saving of Life.—Under “Fire Prevention” special requirements in the Building Act can greatly influence the safety of life by requiring practical exits and sufficient staircase accommodation. The risks in theatres and assembly halls require separate legislation. In ordinary structures no inmate of a building should be more than sixty feet away from a staircase, and preferably there should be two staircases at his disposal in the event of one being blocked. Generally, attention is only given to the construction of staircases; but it must be pointed out that their ventilation is equally important. Smoke is even a greater danger than fire, and may hamper the helpers terribly. The possibility of opening a window has saved many a life.

Safety of Property.—As far as the protection of property is concerned, the prevention of outbreaks can be influenced by the careful construction of flues, hearths, stoves, and in certain classes of buildings by the construction of floors and ceilings, the arrangement of skylights, shutters and lightning conductors. Then comes the prevention of the fire spreading, first, by the division of risks, and secondly, by the materials used in construction.

The legislator’s first ambition must be to prevent a fire in one house from spreading to another, and a stranger’s property, so to say, from being endangered. This is quite possible, given good party walls carried well over the roof to a height regulated by the nature of the risk, the provision of the shutters to windows where necessary, and the use of fire-resisting glass. Again, a thoroughly good roof—or still better, a fire-resisting attic floor—can do much. If the locality has a fire brigade and the force is efficiently handled, “spreads” from one house to another should never occur. Narrow thoroughfares and courts are, however, a source of danger which may baffle all efforts to localize a fire. This should be remembered by those responsible for street improvements.

The division of a building or large “risk” into a number of minor ones is only possible to a certain extent. There is no need to spend enormous sums to make each of the minor “risks” impregnable. The desire should be simply to try to retard the spread for a certain limited time after the flames have really taken hold of the contents. In those minutes most fires will have been discovered, and, where there is an efficient fire-extinguishing establishment, a sufficient number of firemen can be on the spot to localize the outbreak and prevent the conflagration from becoming a big one. In the drawing-room of an ordinary well-built house, for example, if the joists are strong and the boards grooved, if some light pugging be used and the plastering properly done, if the doors are made well-fitting and fairly strong, a very considerable amount of furniture and fittings can remain well alight for half an hour before there is a spread. In a warehouse or factory “risk” the same holds good. With well-built wooden floors, thickly pugged, and the ceilings perhaps run on wire netting or on metal instead of on laths, with ordinary double ledged doors safely hung, at the most perhaps lined with sheet iron or asbestos cloth, a very stiff blaze can be imprisoned for a considerable time. Many of the recent forms of “patent” flooring are exceedingly useful for the division of “risks,” and with their aid a fire can be limited to an individual storey of a building, but it should not be forgotten that even the best of flooring is useless if carried by unprotected iron girders supported, say, by some light framing or weak partition. The general mistake made in using expensive iron and concrete construction is the tendency to allow some breach to be made (for lifts, shafting, &c.), through which the fire spreads, or to forget that the protection of the supports and girder-work requires most careful attention.

Of the various systems of “patent” flooring, as a rule the simpler forms are the more satisfactory. It should, however, always be remembered that any specific form of flooring alone does not prevent a fire breaking from one “risk” to another. They should go hand in hand with general good construction, and naked ironwork must be non-existent. Some of the modern fire-resisting floors are too expensive to permit their introduction for fire protection alone. In considering their introduction, the general advantages which they afford as to spans, thickness, general stability, &c., should be taken into account. A practical installation of floors, partitions, doors, &c., should, first, not increase the cost of a building more than 5%, and secondly should add to the general value of the structure by giving it a more substantial character.

The danger of lift wells, skylights and shaft openings should not be forgotten. The last should be as small as possible, well armed with shutters, the skylights should have fire-resisting glass, and the lifts not only vertical doors, but also horizontal flaps, cutting up the well into sections. The question of light partitions must also not be neglected.

Division of “risks,” common-sense construction, and proper staircase accommodation are really all that fire protection requires, and where the special Building Act clauses have been kept within the lines indicated, there has been little friction and discontent. It is only as a rule when the authorities are eccentric in their demands that the building owner considers himself harassed by protective measures.

Fire survey regulations should mainly aim at preventing the actual outbreak of fire. In certain classes of risks fire survey can also increase the personal safety of the inmates and lessen the possibility of a fire spreading. The provision of fire-escapes