Respecting St. Paul’s Cathedral I believe the arrangements for extinguishing fire are fairly good, but the building itself is far more combustible than most persons imagine; and though the risk of fire commencing from the interior is very slight (except when the enormous quantity of timber is introduced for seats at special festivals), there is always a certain amount of danger from the tall warehouses so closely hemming it in on all sides. The chief director of the Salvage Corps thinks it very possible that the conflagration of one of these buildings would set on fire the dome of St. Paul’s, provided the building burnt freely and the wind was strong in the direction of the Cathedral. The inevitable plumber is doubtless often at work on some portion of the roof with his open fire and the mode of handling it that almost burnt Canterbury Cathedral, and thoroughly succeeded at the Alexandra Palace.
The following is from the ‘Bulletin de la Société Centrale des Architectes,’ 1871, communicated by the Secretary of that society to the Royal Institute of British Architects, and is most valuable, as the practical experience of the results of fires at Paris during the Commune:—
‘1. Walls of freestone.—The walls constructed of freestone are seriously deteriorated, the stone being destroyed by disintegration and the calcination of the limestone. 2. Walls of rough stone.—Rubble walls, covered with a thick layer of plaster, have, owing to this preservative coating, remained unchanged, and generally they will be retained in the process of reconstruction. 3. Brick and (calcareous Sicilian) millstone walls.—Walling of these kinds has generally resisted better in cellars and underground construction; and as to the brick in partition-walls, the brick flues of chimneys remained almost intact. 4. Floors, roofs, and timber partitions.—Wood in floors and roofs has been completely consumed, but in wooden partitions, where a coat of plaster sufficiently thick was exposed to the action of the fire, the wood has been completely preserved. Some curious facts have been the result. An angle-post having been attacked in an upper storey, the fire afterwards extended itself in the interior of the post without gaining the external surface, so that the post assumed the appearance of a pipe, the interior of which had been hollowed out by the fire.
‘Oak lintels covered with plaster have resisted without injury the flames which traversed the bays of which the lintels formed the upper part. 5. Floors and roofs of iron.—Iron has not resisted the action of fire. If it has not been consumed like wood, it has undergone twisting and contortion, which render it unfit to be used again. Numerous fantastic examples have been observed, especially at the Palais de Justice, the Hôtel de Ville, and the Théâtre Lyrique. The character of iron is not to propagate combustion, but, under the influence of a very high temperature, to undergo such extension that it allows the escape of the masonry it was intended to retain.’
CHAPTER IX.
FIRE AND ITS DANGERS.
FIRE, although most useful in its proper place, is the source of almost countless loss and destruction, and has well earned the character often given it, of being the best of servants but the worst of masters. Everyone knows how it has been feared by men from the world’s commencement, and worshipped by idolaters even to the present day, when millions still bow down to what they fear instead of to a Being they can love.
And perhaps it is not only its destructive power that causes fire thus to be reverenced by the ignorant, and dreaded in many forms by the more enlightened. Its mysterious origin and power of spontaneously coming into existence help to characterise it as the most remarkable of the elements, and to increase the liability to dangerous results when it has fuel to feed upon.
It is not my purpose to notice the various applications of fire in ways that cause it to bring about incalculable good to mankind. A moment’s thought as to what would result if fire could not be applied in numberless needful instances, and we had nothing to supply its place, will convince us that its value is far greater than all the loss it causes. But there often is loss, and to a considerable extent; and as this is generally preventable, it will be well for us to consider what are the proper means to adopt in order to guard against it.
The buildings in which fires occur most frequently are our ordinary dwelling-houses, because they largely outnumber all other classes of buildings—not perhaps because they are more liable to be burnt than others. I can find no authentic return of fires that have occurred throughout Great Britain, and therefore cannot give statistics of the relative proportions of the various kinds of structures that have been burnt. It seems to me a great mistake not to have an accurate report of every fire that happens, with full details of its cause, the damage done, &c.; the particulars might be registered more easily, and with less expense, than births and deaths are; and it is open to question if the benefit derived from such a course would not be of at least equal good. When a death results from fire the inquest often discloses facts which, if known before, might have prevented death; and it would be little trouble to arrange for the coroner or some qualified official to hold an enquiry—without a jury, of course—concerning every fire reported to him by the fire brigade in his district. If this had been done in bygone years there would not now be that ignorance of construction and of the right means of saving life and property which unhappily prevails. Why the insurance offices have not supported and carried into practice some such idea is possibly to be explained by the undoubted fact that a good fire brings them fresh business.
The number of fires is increasing rapidly every year in a proportion quicker than the increase of building or population; the explanation being that as the houses get crowded together they are more liable to be set on fire by external agency. But the increase, serious as it appears, is curiously small when one takes into account the causes, multiplying every day, by which this destruction may be effected. In the last few years London and many large towns have become intersected by railways, and the fires and sparks of engines are frequently scattered about as if the stations and dwellings near were bomb-proof. Vessels may be seen on the Thames and elsewhere getting up steam close to the windows of warehouses with inflammable goods inside; steam, with its attendant dangers, is used in places and for purposes never thought of a short time since. Gas, with its unmistakable smell, however, making it somewhat safe, is in large use; while its modern rivals, the explosive oils, are being too carelessly used in an increasing extent. Friction-matches only a few years ago were not to be found in the houses of the poor, but are now used by everyone. The use of tobacco has extended, and there is reason to believe very many fires are due directly or indirectly to it. Stoves, instead of the open fireplaces, are in larger request, and their flues are more dangerous than the old-fashioned wide chimneys. These, and other less important facts, will explain the following statistics given in evidence by Captain Shaw before a Parliamentary Committee: ‘During the 34 years since 1840, the population of London has increased from 1,907,036 to 3,342,490, or 75 per cent.; and the number of houses from 258,425 to 479,329, or 82 per cent. But during the same period the number of fires has more than doubled, having jumped from 681 to 1,548—equal to an increase of 127 per cent. The total number of fires throughout the 34 years was 38,241.’