The American Architect and Building News. Vol. XXXIII.
Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 821.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
SEPTEMBER 19, 1891.
Summary : —oUMMARYI
The Park Place (New York) Disaster and the Coroner’s Verdict. — Alleged Corruptibility of New York Deputy Building Inspectors —McNeil vs. the Boston Chamber of Commerce. — Collapse of a Kitchen Boiler. — Excavations to be made in the Pass of the Great St. Bernard. — How to
localize a Defect in Machinery in Operation..........................173 German Architecture.—VII........................................................................175 The Management of an Architect’s Office.—III.........................178 Letter from Canada.........................................................................................180 Letter from Washington.................................................................181 Letter from London.........................................................................................183 Letter from Paris.............................................................................................184 Mechanical Ventilation.................................................................................186 Illustrations : —
Houses on 86tli St., New York, N. Y. — House of Stephen B. Elkins, Esq., Randolph Co., W. Va. — Reception-hall of the Same.—Main Staircase of the Same. — Fireplace in Library of the Same. — Children’s Room of the Same.— Edzell Castle, Scotland, Exterior of the Garden Wall. — Building for the Mendelssohn Glee-Club, New York, N. Y.—Plans and Longitudinal Section of the Same.— Elevation and Cross-section of the Same. — Details from the Ambulatory of the Choir of the Cathedral, Chartres, France. Additional: House in the Karlring, Buda-Pesth, Hungary.— The Gallery of the Prophets, Rheims Cathedral. — Details of the Same. — All Hallow’s, Southwark, Eng. — East End of the Same.— Morning Chapel of the Same. — Interior of the Same. — National Bank of Spain, Prado, Madrid,
Spain —Four Interior Views of the Same.................................187
Communications: —
A Correction. — Plaster Board.......................................................187
Notes and Clippings...................................................................................................188 Trade Surveys................................................................................................................188
THE verdict at the inquest on the Park Place disaster, in New York, appears to have caused a good deal of disappointment to the newspaper reporters, who perhaps looked for something more sensational, in the shape of a charge of manslaughter against some person. The jury found, however, that the collapse was caused by the breaking of one or more iron columns, near the middle of the first story, and that the breaking was due to some sudden external shock. What this shock may have come from, the jury did not say, but it is to be supposed that they attributed it to an explosion of some sort; and this opinion, notwithstanding the wild talk in the newspapers about the overloading of the floors, the vibration of the building under the motion of the presses, and so on, appears to be shared by all the experts who have examined the building. Captain Damrell, the Inspector of Buildings of Boston, and a man of great experience in such matters, concluded, immediately upon reading the early accounts of the catastrophe, that it was probably brought about by an explosion ; and subsequent developments have confirmed the correctness of his surmise. It is not impossible that, according to our advanced modern ideas, the floors in the upper rooms, which were occupied by a lithographer, were overloaded; and it is unquestionable that the removal of the two cross-walls which once existed in the upper part of the building weakened it; but although they might have made the ruin more complete, there is no indication that either of these circumstances caused the catastrophe. On the contrary, as the breaking of wood in beams is always preceded by great deflection, and as any serious deflection would throw presses so much out of level that they could not be properly operated, the fact that the lithographic presses were in active use to the very moment of the crash is sufficient proof that the overloading, if it existed, was far from reaching the dangerpoint. So with the vibration, of which absurd stories were told in the newspapers. As every architect knows, a brick building is elastic enough to support, without injury, a considerable amount of vibration, while printing on a press vibrating seriously would be a difficult matter; so that the regular use of the presses shows that the movement of the building which supported them was of limited extent. Moreover, the fall of a building through long continued overloading or vibration is generally preceded by the appearance of cracks in the walls, as
well as bending of the floors ; yet there seems to be no evidence of any noticeable cracking; and again, the failure of a floor, at least, would generally cause the walls to fall inward, while the street wall, in this case, fell outward. From all these considerations, it appears tolerably certain that the failure was due to an impulse from the middle portion of the structure outwards. This impulse might have been given directly, or indirectly, as the jury thought, by the breaking of a column near the outside wall, and the consequent throwing of the weight of the floors in that direction, but, in either case, the impulse must have been such as hardly anything but the theory of an explosion will account for, and it is proved that ample material for producing explosions, in the shape of benzine, which was used in the building by the barrelful, naphtha, which was employed in the manufacture of rubber cement, and floating bronze powder, were constantly at hand. Even without the suggestion which is made, with great show of probability, that gas from the street mains may have leaked into the cellar, we should be inclined to wonder that the explosion had been delayed so long, rather than that it should have occurred at last. There is little doubt that the persons who used and stored the benzine and naphtha did so in violation of the law which limits the quantity of such substances to be kept in a building, and some of the newspapers urge that all buildings should be regularly inspected, not only to see how much explosive material is kept in them, but whether the floors are overloaded. The obvious answer to this is that the inspection would be very costly, and of little real service, as, between the inspector’s visits, the danger might become worse than ever; but, as we have before suggested, it is worth considering whether the public safety might not judiciously be promoted by the enactment of statutes, making the tenant in whose premises fire originated, in a building with several tenants, responsible for the losses caused to his fellowtenants, or to neighboring property, by the spread of the fire. This is the French and Italian, and, we believe, also the German law at this day, and it would seem to he a natural corollary from the legal principle that every man is responsible for injury caused to others by his own carelessness or negligence ; but an Act of the British Parliament, long anterior to our Revolution, expressly provided that a man should not be responsible for damage caused by the spread of fire from his premises to those of others; and we suppose that this view would be held to have been adopted from the English common law into ours in all the Atlantic States. In Texas, Louisiana, California and the other States formed out of former Spanish, Mexican or French territory, since the Revolution, we believe that lawyers consider the English common law to have no authority, and a suit by an insurance company against a tenant or owner in whose premises a fire began, would perhaps give a chance for the display of some very pretty legal archaeology.
C
OMPLAINTS have recently been circulating through the newspapers, not for the first time, about the corruption of
the New York deputy inspectors of buildings, who are said to multiply the difficulties and delays incident to the passing of plans, and the approval of executed constructions, for the purpose of extorting fees for accelerating the examination of plans, or closing their eyes to irregularities in construction. Probably the evil is exaggerated, but the deputy inspectors are poorly paid for very laborious, difficult and responsible work, and an occasional yielding to the temptation to accept a small present for an endeavor to oblige would not be very surprising. However, any favor, bought or unbought, shown to one man is an injustice to many others, and the whole process of inspection of plans and buildings ought to be made as simple as possible. The fact is that New York is too large to have only a single office for such matters, and it would save time and labor, besides promoting security, to adopt the London plan, by which the city is divided into districts, and some experienced architect in each is made District Surveyor. His duty is to examine, and approve or reject, the plans for all buildings to be erected in his district, and to inspect, from time to time, the structures while in process of erection. In most cases, the District Surveyor exercises these functions without abandoning, in the least, his private practice as an architect, but there are a few districts where the surveyor finds it more satisfactory to devote his whole time to his official duties. Instead of salaries, the district surveyors
Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 821.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
SEPTEMBER 19, 1891.
Summary : —oUMMARYI
The Park Place (New York) Disaster and the Coroner’s Verdict. — Alleged Corruptibility of New York Deputy Building Inspectors —McNeil vs. the Boston Chamber of Commerce. — Collapse of a Kitchen Boiler. — Excavations to be made in the Pass of the Great St. Bernard. — How to
localize a Defect in Machinery in Operation..........................173 German Architecture.—VII........................................................................175 The Management of an Architect’s Office.—III.........................178 Letter from Canada.........................................................................................180 Letter from Washington.................................................................181 Letter from London.........................................................................................183 Letter from Paris.............................................................................................184 Mechanical Ventilation.................................................................................186 Illustrations : —
Houses on 86tli St., New York, N. Y. — House of Stephen B. Elkins, Esq., Randolph Co., W. Va. — Reception-hall of the Same.—Main Staircase of the Same. — Fireplace in Library of the Same. — Children’s Room of the Same.— Edzell Castle, Scotland, Exterior of the Garden Wall. — Building for the Mendelssohn Glee-Club, New York, N. Y.—Plans and Longitudinal Section of the Same.— Elevation and Cross-section of the Same. — Details from the Ambulatory of the Choir of the Cathedral, Chartres, France. Additional: House in the Karlring, Buda-Pesth, Hungary.— The Gallery of the Prophets, Rheims Cathedral. — Details of the Same. — All Hallow’s, Southwark, Eng. — East End of the Same.— Morning Chapel of the Same. — Interior of the Same. — National Bank of Spain, Prado, Madrid,
Spain —Four Interior Views of the Same.................................187
Communications: —
A Correction. — Plaster Board.......................................................187
Notes and Clippings...................................................................................................188 Trade Surveys................................................................................................................188
THE verdict at the inquest on the Park Place disaster, in New York, appears to have caused a good deal of disappointment to the newspaper reporters, who perhaps looked for something more sensational, in the shape of a charge of manslaughter against some person. The jury found, however, that the collapse was caused by the breaking of one or more iron columns, near the middle of the first story, and that the breaking was due to some sudden external shock. What this shock may have come from, the jury did not say, but it is to be supposed that they attributed it to an explosion of some sort; and this opinion, notwithstanding the wild talk in the newspapers about the overloading of the floors, the vibration of the building under the motion of the presses, and so on, appears to be shared by all the experts who have examined the building. Captain Damrell, the Inspector of Buildings of Boston, and a man of great experience in such matters, concluded, immediately upon reading the early accounts of the catastrophe, that it was probably brought about by an explosion ; and subsequent developments have confirmed the correctness of his surmise. It is not impossible that, according to our advanced modern ideas, the floors in the upper rooms, which were occupied by a lithographer, were overloaded; and it is unquestionable that the removal of the two cross-walls which once existed in the upper part of the building weakened it; but although they might have made the ruin more complete, there is no indication that either of these circumstances caused the catastrophe. On the contrary, as the breaking of wood in beams is always preceded by great deflection, and as any serious deflection would throw presses so much out of level that they could not be properly operated, the fact that the lithographic presses were in active use to the very moment of the crash is sufficient proof that the overloading, if it existed, was far from reaching the dangerpoint. So with the vibration, of which absurd stories were told in the newspapers. As every architect knows, a brick building is elastic enough to support, without injury, a considerable amount of vibration, while printing on a press vibrating seriously would be a difficult matter; so that the regular use of the presses shows that the movement of the building which supported them was of limited extent. Moreover, the fall of a building through long continued overloading or vibration is generally preceded by the appearance of cracks in the walls, as
well as bending of the floors ; yet there seems to be no evidence of any noticeable cracking; and again, the failure of a floor, at least, would generally cause the walls to fall inward, while the street wall, in this case, fell outward. From all these considerations, it appears tolerably certain that the failure was due to an impulse from the middle portion of the structure outwards. This impulse might have been given directly, or indirectly, as the jury thought, by the breaking of a column near the outside wall, and the consequent throwing of the weight of the floors in that direction, but, in either case, the impulse must have been such as hardly anything but the theory of an explosion will account for, and it is proved that ample material for producing explosions, in the shape of benzine, which was used in the building by the barrelful, naphtha, which was employed in the manufacture of rubber cement, and floating bronze powder, were constantly at hand. Even without the suggestion which is made, with great show of probability, that gas from the street mains may have leaked into the cellar, we should be inclined to wonder that the explosion had been delayed so long, rather than that it should have occurred at last. There is little doubt that the persons who used and stored the benzine and naphtha did so in violation of the law which limits the quantity of such substances to be kept in a building, and some of the newspapers urge that all buildings should be regularly inspected, not only to see how much explosive material is kept in them, but whether the floors are overloaded. The obvious answer to this is that the inspection would be very costly, and of little real service, as, between the inspector’s visits, the danger might become worse than ever; but, as we have before suggested, it is worth considering whether the public safety might not judiciously be promoted by the enactment of statutes, making the tenant in whose premises fire originated, in a building with several tenants, responsible for the losses caused to his fellowtenants, or to neighboring property, by the spread of the fire. This is the French and Italian, and, we believe, also the German law at this day, and it would seem to he a natural corollary from the legal principle that every man is responsible for injury caused to others by his own carelessness or negligence ; but an Act of the British Parliament, long anterior to our Revolution, expressly provided that a man should not be responsible for damage caused by the spread of fire from his premises to those of others; and we suppose that this view would be held to have been adopted from the English common law into ours in all the Atlantic States. In Texas, Louisiana, California and the other States formed out of former Spanish, Mexican or French territory, since the Revolution, we believe that lawyers consider the English common law to have no authority, and a suit by an insurance company against a tenant or owner in whose premises a fire began, would perhaps give a chance for the display of some very pretty legal archaeology.
C
OMPLAINTS have recently been circulating through the newspapers, not for the first time, about the corruption of
the New York deputy inspectors of buildings, who are said to multiply the difficulties and delays incident to the passing of plans, and the approval of executed constructions, for the purpose of extorting fees for accelerating the examination of plans, or closing their eyes to irregularities in construction. Probably the evil is exaggerated, but the deputy inspectors are poorly paid for very laborious, difficult and responsible work, and an occasional yielding to the temptation to accept a small present for an endeavor to oblige would not be very surprising. However, any favor, bought or unbought, shown to one man is an injustice to many others, and the whole process of inspection of plans and buildings ought to be made as simple as possible. The fact is that New York is too large to have only a single office for such matters, and it would save time and labor, besides promoting security, to adopt the London plan, by which the city is divided into districts, and some experienced architect in each is made District Surveyor. His duty is to examine, and approve or reject, the plans for all buildings to be erected in his district, and to inspect, from time to time, the structures while in process of erection. In most cases, the District Surveyor exercises these functions without abandoning, in the least, his private practice as an architect, but there are a few districts where the surveyor finds it more satisfactory to devote his whole time to his official duties. Instead of salaries, the district surveyors