FIRE'S HAVOC 



261 



surance companies in a ])et that our buildings would burn. During 

 the year we have paid those companies in fire-insurance premiums 

 $316,000,000. They liave paid ns l)ack in adjusted losses $135,000,000, 

 so that the difference between those two sums, $181,000,000, is the 

 amount we have paid those companies for tlie privilege of getting back 

 a little over half of the value of the property we ha^■e ]iermitted to be 

 destroyed by fire. Applying the paid losses of $135,000,000 on the 

 burned value of $218,000,000, the net loss in property value was $83,- 

 000,000, the cost of fire "' protection " of all kinds was $300,000,000 

 and the amount we o-ave the insurance comiianies to o-narantee us some 



IJUILDl.Ni; THE FLOOKS and rUOTECTING THE StEELWoKK WITH 11(11, LOW FlHE- 



PROOFiNG Tile in a Modern Skyscraper. 



reimbursement for our losses was $181,000,000, so that the total of de- 

 stroyed values and incidental costs of fire for the year was $564,000,000. 

 Compare this figure that we might call destruction with the new 

 buildings added, $510,000,000, or what we might call production, and 

 the result is not one of which we have any reason to be proud. 



Eliminating the consideration of the cost of fire-fighting, we have 

 destroyed in property values $1,258,000,000 worth in the past five 

 years! Again eliminating all incidental expenses fire alone has cost 

 us in 1908, $2.73 per capita. Compare that to the fire losses in Euro- 

 pean countries and you will realize how far behind them we are in fire- 

 prevention. In France. Germanv. Ttalv. Switzerland, Austria and 



