Ballantyne's Fire Inquiry Continues

Chronicle (Levin), 4 June 1948, Page 7

Ballantyne's Fire Inquiry Continues

CHRISTCHURCH, June 3. A disclqsure tliat an inspection of the electrical installation at Ballantyne's in September, 1940, revealed over 100 de fects resulted in a close crossexamination of J. S. Forsyth, the engineer of the Municipal Electricity Department, by Mr. R. A. Young (for the Crown. He said that the diseovery miglit well have altered the whole course of' the inquiry by the Koyal Commission. Forsyth said under cross-examination .that he did not think the diseovery oi such a nuraber of defects in a single installation constituted a record or a hazard to life, though eonsideration Wjonld depend on the circumstances. LT they did constitute a liazard tliere weri probablv numerous installations i:i Christchurch that would have to be dis connected. It appeared that an inspe--tion at Ballantyne's in 1937 had no. ; been made until a nionth after the in stallation had been connected up. To Mr. W. R. Lascelles (re-cxamining for the City Council), Forsyth said it was undesirable to have wires ruri ning across the front of buildings Owners objected to the disligurement caused by such wires. The point o'" enfrv for the wires at Ballantyne's. was perfeetlv safe. If tne miiu defects, such as diselosed in th • inspection of Ballantvne 's. constituted •i hazard, it would probablv be nece.-i-sary to disconnect niany installationin the citv.

The chairman (Sir Harold Johnston, K.C.): Assuming that the fire oecunv.il at the poiut of contact betwe°« th.cable and the bearer in the cellar as :» result of a fault, would the floor joist.--1)0 the lirst combustible materials en countered? — It would depend where the gases from the cable ignited. The Chairman; Assuming the Tlieory of Salveseii to be correct, ean you form an opinion where the fire started? — It • po.ssiLle it would start at the beare it' the arcing occurred tliere amopg th.* combustible gases. Edmunil Charles flee, inspector for the municipal electricity departmen; for 24 years until last year, said !u retested Ballantyne's installation in 1940. If during iiis inspection he saw an\ thing which in his opinion caused n risk or danger to life or property, he would have disconnected it immediate Iv. The records showed tliat he had .lescribed the cable and tliat indicated that he had inspected the cable. To Mr. T. A. Gresson, for Ballarv tyne's, witness said that although the main cable was inspected, he had not tested it. After he had told Mr. W. H. Mathi•mn, for the Fire Brigades Union,' tha' he had inspected many installations the size bf Ballantyne's, Gee said that he fpun(L defects in many, some being far-wors,C than the defects he found in Ballantyne/si To M¥. 3$, 1?. Rowie, for Thompson and Dorre'eh, electr.ical eugineers, wit ncss said that ;f defective joints in- the cpnducto;- had been tliere in 1940, h" f'el.t sure he would have seeh tlieui ami if he , had he would have reported oi! ,. i Six municipal' ernployees who had carried out w:brks on the mains noa, Ballantyne's, gave evidcnce. Each said he had not noficed the joints in Ba! lantyne's "onduetors and said he had done uo work on Ballantyne's installa j tion.