THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9. 1881. PUBLIC SAFETY IN THEATRES.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2171, 9 February 1881, Page 2

THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9. 1881. PUBLIC SAFETY IN THEATRES.

At the last meeting of the City Council, the surveyor reported that he had inspected the Theatre Royal, and found it satisfactory, to use his own words, “ he had reported satisfactorily upon it.” The application of the Theatre Royal proprietor for a renewal of his license had heen postponed, we may premise from a former meeting especially, that the surveyor should report -upon the means of egress provided in case of fire. It is, therefore, to be presumed that Mr. Walkden did make this survey. We say “ presumed,” because there is not the slightest indication on the face of the official report to the Council on any document laid before it to show that it was so made. It may bo that the Theatre Royal is thoroughly provided not only with the means of rapid and safe exit in case of fire or an alarm, but that also water is immediately available. On the other hand, neither of these matters may have been attended to, and that under the circumstances of a fire or any other alarm being given, great loss of life might occur. We do not for one moment say it is so, but, particularly as the licence was adjourned temporarily until this inspection had been made, the public have a right to know officially whether such precautions as are necessary have been taken. It is also only fair to the lessee and owner of the Theatre that this should be made known. A doubt has been cast on the existence of the precautions, and yet all wo are told after the inspection is, that the report is “ favorable ” That may mean a great deal, or nothing at all. It may merely bo an official euphuism for walking through the building, or it may mean that Mr. Walkden is satisfied that if a fire were to occur in the Theatre, those inside would have every opportunity of making their exit as speedily as possible. Which it does mean, however, we are not informed. It is not sufficient, we would desire to point out to Mr. Walkden, that he should be satisfied as to the existence of these requirements. That is one part of the matter truly. But the general public —those who visit the theatre—are entitled to bo assured that in so doing they are not running any 'extraordinary risk. Besides, we want to know, you know, upon what grounds Mr. Walkden reports “ satisfactorily.” Is there on the stage or in close proximity thereto, any fire hose for use in case of emergency ? Such a provision has saved what else might have been a serious conflagration, and perhaps might be the means of preventing loss of life. But we are net informed if such . exists in our local theatre. If it does not, then certainly the report from a public point of view should not be satisfactory, and immediate notice given to the proprietor to provide it. Whore large masses of people are congregated together, it is more especially the duty of the authorities to see that all reasonable precautions are taken to prevent any serious or fatal

consequences, arising from an alarm being given or a panic taking place. And when the public aro made aware, as we contend they should be, that these precautions exist, they are less likely to he seized with that wild fear which paralyses every effort to escape, and in nine cases out of ten does all the mischief. In what wo have said it must not bo taken for one moment that we suppose Mr, Walkden would have arrived at the conclusions he did without good reason, or on false premises. That has nothing to do with the point we aro discussing. What we contend is, that as a feeling of security in the public mind is half the battle in saving loss of life in case of a stampede, it is highly necessary that tho public should have before them, what really aro the measures of precaution taken by the proprietors of the Theatre and other public places of resort to enable them to get out quickly in case of need. This is just what Mr. Walkden has omitted to do, and wo trust that his report, which is vaguely alluded to as being “satisfactory,” will be laid before the public through tho columns of the papers, at an early date. We shall then be enabled to see if the precautions so taken, are of a sufficient character or otherwise.

THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD OP HEALTH.

It is exceedingly difficult to understand really what object the City Council Sanitary Committee had in waiting on the Board of Health recently. Ostensibly they went there to confer on the subject of the transfer of the powers of the Board of Health to the city, hut really when they got there they had nothing whatever to say. A number of difficulties —the greater part of which were unascertain, able by the deputation—were raised, and the conference so-called perished at its birth. We certainly gave the chairman of the sanitary committee. Councillor Taylor, credit for more ’cuteness than this. He hails from a country where the wits are supposed to he protematurally sharpened, and yet he convoys a deputation which has to return to prepare that information which they should have had cut and dried before seeking the interview. The common sense course suggested by the Chairman of the Board, ought certainly to have occurred to the deputation before paying their barren visit. They asserted that difficulties existed, but gave no idea of what they were, beyond vaguely sketching them in a few remarks. Thus it came about that the deputation, after losing considerable time, have had to do that which was plainly and unmistakably their duty at first, and have returned like schoolboys to get their lesson learnt perfectly. It was easy when these doubts occurred to them, to submit to the solicitor the reasons which induced them to beliovo that the Board could not clothe the City Council with ample powers, and request his advice as to tho method to he adopted. They had, it was true, submitted some, hut not the crucial one, and now the whole matter is hung up for a still further period, which cannot hut be regarded as a great public inconvenience.