NAPIER FIRES

Hokitika Guardian, 25 June 1931, Page 6

NAPIER FIRES

DUE TO QUAKE

THE CORONER'S FENDING

(lly Telegraph—Pei Press Association)

NAPIER, June 23

“1 hud by a clear preponderance of evidence that there is no proof of destructive outbreaks of original fire within the burnt out area, except in the three chemists’ shops,’’ stated Mr J. 8. Barton, in his verdict in connection with the fire which followed the earthquake in iNapier on February 3.

Mr Barton's verdict was as follows : “The said fire was caused by conditions following tne earthquake, comprising damaged buildings, scattered stock in trade and broken light, heat and power reticulation. The fire followed the earthquake which took place at about 10.30 on the morning of the day in question, and the evidence is that it broke out within a few minutes alter the earthquake. The conditions were favourable to the spread of the tire, in that it was a hot, fine day, following a dry spell of weather. At the time of the outbreak of the lire, the wind was westerly or offshore, but within half an hour to an hour after the earthquake it changed to an easterly or south-easterly wind, and the change was favourable to ihe spread of the fire.

"it is proved that the first alarm of lire was from the chemist’s shop occupied by the United Friendly Societies' dispensary in Emerson Street, and the tire that originated there, destroyed these premises, but was confined to them. Subsequent calls came within a few minutes fijom two other chemists' shops, namely those of R. Henderson and A. Hobson, respectively, each of which is situated in Hastings Street. From these shops the fire spread into the adjoining buildings, and was then carried by the easterly wind over the chief business area, spreading by contact and . by sparks carried by the wind.

“The water pressure was comparatively weak from the beginning and gradually grew less till it fail-cl altogether within ail hour after the quake, and the fire then spread unchecked over the greater part of the area. "The probabilities of further independent contemporaneous outbreaks of file iin that area cannot he overlooked, but although the fullest possible preliminary enquiries were made by the police, the only evidence of such at the inquest wits of an incipient outbreak at the back •of the business premises of F. Thorp (which outbreak was immediately suppressed by Mr Thorp), and coullicting testimony as. to the observation of the outbreaks at two other places."