998 PROCEEDINGS OF SECTION H. 
Fink’s Buildings. At the bottom the walls are thick, gradually 
reducing upwards, so that the upper portions would be more 
quickly heated through, and in expanding would force out the 
return walls at each end. On cooling, the brickwork not having 
sufficient cohesive power to pull the walls back again, must crack, 
and did so, the crack being widest at the top and dying off to 
nothing at the bottom. An eye-witness states that the crack 
increased in size as the building cooled. Fink’s Buildings, though 
excessively tall, is a testimony to the value of return walls at 
reasonable distances apart. Comparing this with Crawford’s and 
Sargood’s, allowance must, however, be made for the fact that 
Fink’s Buildings was mainly occupied as offices, whereas the two 
latter were warehouses, stacked with inflammable goods, and hence 
the intensity of the fire was much greater. A marked example of 
the bulging of a wall may also be seen in Mr. Wise’s premises, 
where that adjoining Fink’s Buildings is bent like a bow, but 
had not fallen. 
The extraordinary shapes that wrought-iron takes when subject 
to heat is exemplified in many of the destroyed buildings, but it 
is too well known to need description. I must, however, call 
attention to the defective system of construction adopted in many 
of the buildings, in connecting columns and girders. — Instead of 
the cast-iron columns seating on one another from top to bottom 
of the buildings, and allowing the girders to pass through boxes, 
or be supported on brackets, the girders are simply stiffened at the 
bearing point and the columns seated thereon storey by storey. 
It is bad for ordinary weight-bearing, but worse when attacked by 
fire; for the girders, being continuous, have much greater 
thrusting and pulling power on the walls, and directly one girder 
goes a heavy additional strain is put on all above it. By seating 
column on column this would be largely avoided; and had it been 
adopted much of the great destruction of the walling and spread 
of the fire would, I believe, have been obviated. A remarkable 
escape of a whole front (that of Crawford and Company’s) with 
extremely slender cast-iron columns must also be referred to ; 
while in an adjoining building the cast-iron of some of the 
‘olumns is partially melted, showing the intensity of the heat. In 
the former case the wind, however, blew the fire away from, while in 
the latter it blew it.on to, thecolumns. It is well known that fire- 
men are very distrustful of ironwork in buildings, and with reason, 
and also that they advocate wooden. girders and posts in leu 
thereof. In the small stores adjoining Fink’s Buildings to the 
east, timber was used for this purpose. The charred remains of 
the girders are still in position, but were so badly burnt as to be 
useless. In Crawford & Co’s. three-storey building the timber 
girders have, however, suffered even more, being totally destroyed, 
and only a black line of charred material shows on the debris 
