House and Garden 
1 he Mills Building. Stonework scarred at AA, brick above undamaged 
it is from as severe a shake as this last. Of course, 
there is still the possibility, though remote, that there 
may be a shaking-up, a volcano, or some such ter¬ 
rible upheaval that would mean the absolute 
destruction of all the works of man; but we hardly 
need to have that in mind when building. 
In San Francisco, as everywhere in our country. 
d be San Francisco Gas and Electric Building. Stone¬ 
work damaged. lirick and terra-cotta of upper 
stories undamaged though interior is completely 
gutted. The St. Francis Hotel in the background with 
steel frame of new portion unhurt 
there is a grave misconception of 
the term “fire-proof.” People 
have been fooled by it, and tenants 
have got into the habit of tak¬ 
ing no precaution against fire, o r 
no insurance against loss, because 
of the occupancy of buildings called 
“fire-proof” but that can be most 
damaged in all their parts (except¬ 
ing the essentially structural skele¬ 
ton, the floors and partitions) and 
afford scant protection to their con¬ 
tents. Architects seem to forget and 
the layman apparently does not know 
that a building that is merely of non¬ 
combustible materials is not “fire¬ 
proof”; that a building that is 
of fire-proof material but not 
of fire-proof design is not “fire¬ 
proof”; that a building that is not 
of fire-proof construction and design 
except in part, h not “fire-proof”; 
that a building that is strictly, thor¬ 
oughly fire-proof but filled with combustible mate¬ 
rials may still have a destructive fire in it, but the 
A column in the Fairmont Hotel, one of the newest build¬ 
ings in San Francisco. Built .-under direction of leading 
architects there and alleged to be a model of concrete fire-proof¬ 
ing. It contained no furniture, nothing to burn except the 
floors and doors, yet it was damaged fully 50 per cent of its cost 
136 
