A FIRE PROTECTION FALLACY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3777, 10 April 1928, Page 3

A FIRE PROTECTION FALLACY.

view the previously quoted record* prove the automatic systems to be a much' greater protection from serious loss by fire than would appear at first glance. As an object lesson, I take three fires that have occurred during recent times. Henderson and Pollards furniture factory, Mount Eden, loss £60,000; Kaiapoi Woollen Mina, loss £25,880; Aitcheson’s Fancy Goods and Hardware Warehouse, loss £30,000, a total in round figures of £125,000. Now if auto-protec-tion had been installed in the three places, according to the authentic records previously quoted, the average loss would have been under three per cent., but, say it amounted to ten per cent., there would still have been a saving of over £113,000 and the irony in this matter lies in the fact that in addition to an almost certain immunity from any serious loss by fire, the schedule of rabates on premiums allowed by insurance companies on properties fitted with auto-protection is suffi-

cient to nearly cover, in some cases quite covers, interest on the capital cost of the installation and in certain instances would actually cost owners of properties less than their present annual outlay for protection which affords very little security against serious loss by fire. I have been advocating installation of more automatic protection from fire in this Dominion for many years past. True, there is to date some 270 of one or other of the systems installed throughout N.Z., but that is only a tithe of the number there should be. Installation of automatic alarms or sprinklers in certain, classes of buildings is' compulsory in some parts of the United States, in some parts of Canada, and of Australia and in London the County Council may demand their installation. Unfortunately Fire Brigade Authorities in N.Z. have no jurisdiction in this matter. It is a good sound business proposition but the majority of the proprietors of large business properties have so far turned a deaf ear to the proposal and as it would involve them them in little or no extra expenses, for the following reasons: —-First protection of life; secondly elimination of the “late call” which often causes serious destruction of property other than that in which the lire originated; thirdly as a step to - wards an appreciable reduction of the excessive fire waste prevailing in this Dominion. I would suggest to the city and borough councils throughout N.Z. that they should pass by-laws making it compulsory to instal in certain classes of buildings one or other of the automatic fire protection systems.

Quite a lot has appeared in the daily papers iu reference to the numerous aud destructive grass, bush and such like fires that have swept over a large part of the' Dominion of late, but apart from that particular aspect, with exception of an occasional editorial or letter and a few stray paragraphs now and then very little attention has been given by the Press to the heavy drain on the gnaneial resources of the Dominion caused by the enormous yearly waste by fire. This remark also applies in-general to the business section of the community, and is in sharp contrast to the active interest taken by the Press and business people in other countries where the annual fire loss is somewhat on a par with our own. An illustrating point: “Fire Prevention Week,” instituted by proclamation in the United States of America and in Canada some years ago, was duly observed in October last preceded by an address delivered by the President of the United States setting out therein the shame and horror of the enormous .waste of national wealth caused by fire, mostly due to carelessness, consequently largely preventable. The address, with editorials emphasising its seriousness and need for united action, was published in practically all the leading newspapers of the States. Also, dealing with the same subject, just recently there has been quite a campaign in the papers in Great Britain and where the annual loss by fire amounts to only one-fourtht of that prevailing in New Zealand.

Surely the entire disappearance of property gone sky high in smoke to the amount of 1.1 millions of money in one year and at such a time of stress as” the present, calls for more public interest and action, particularly on the part of the Press with its tremendous influence in any matter pertaining to the welfare of the community than has been exhibited is the past years.

AND ITS REMEDY,

(By Capt. T. T. Hugo). The regrettable yearly increasing destruction-of'property by fire prevailing in New Zealand has been dealt with at some length by me previously and I will only here say that the fire waste for the twelve months ending 31st December, 1926, amounted to not less than one and a-quarter millions of money, that this enormous loss is due to the abnormal number of fires that occurred and that seventy per cent, of the‘.outbreaks were due to a greater or lesser degree of carelessness. The more destructive fires of course, occur in factories, mills; drapers emporiums and large warehouses and I purpose showing how outbreaks of fire on such properties can be extinguished in their incipiency at little or no increase, in fact, in some cases, at less than the present protective outlay on the part of the ownei’S of the properties. ■ ■ THE FALLACY. Many owners of the properties .mentioned pin their faith upon tho solitary nightwatehman system for the protection of their property from devastating fires. A most unreliable method' to depend upon. After a serious fire has occurred in some large establishment, how often we'read in the daily papers, statements that almost immediately before the outbreak was observed the nightwatehman had been through the premises and found all safe, or some patrolling policeman or solitary wayfarer had passed the building, observing nothing out of the ordinary although in each ease almost simultaneously, or only a minute or two later, the fire is visible all over the neighbourhood, and yet there is not the slightest doubt that the watchman or patrol was selfconvinced he was carrying out his duty faithfully and would be highly indignant were anybody to suggest otherwise. Some pertinent experiences: After taking up the appointment of Superintendent of the Wellington Fire Brigade, for two ■yekrs , preceding erection of the present central fire station, I slept in the bell tower of the old Manner’s St. station in an 8 x 6 room directly beneath the glass enclosed look-out room or cabin, for the Brigade nightwatehman. There were no street fire alarms in those days, and the nightwatehman was a typical old Norwegian seaman, and, although I used to go up into the cabin at all hours of the night, particularly when I did not hear his footsteps overhead. Never once throughout the two years did I ever find him even dozing, and yet what happened? About one o’clock one morning I was awakened by a cornmotion in the street caused by men banging on the station doors and shouting “Fii;e.” On looking out of m-" wiqdow I saw' flames belching out of the first floor window of a fancy goods shop and store, on the opposite side of the street, only 170 yards distant from the west of the station. Second instance: A similar commotion in the early hours of tho morning and again a big blaze visible from my window, opposite this time in a large timber mill and yard, only 190 yards on the opposite side but to the east of the station. In both cases the whole situation was clearly visible from really almost directly underneath the lookout cabin. And what of the watchman? He might have been dreaming, but not asleep. I could quote many similar instances that have occurred not only in Wellington, but in other towns and countries, but the, foregoing must suffice.

And what is the explanation? To me a simple and conclusive one. Man is a meditative being and when on watch or patrol duty during the long, monotonous; hours of the night, very often falls into a .“brown study,” possibly “building castles in. Spain,” in fact, dreaming, to the exclusion of all external happenings, automatically moving around or standing in one position for some time, utterly oblivious to his surroundings fox the time being. This explanation was brought home to me many years ago in the following manner. At sea, when on duty, as officer of the watch, as equally when in command, a number of times the look-out man has reported a light or point of land then clearly visible which' I myself should have seen some time before, and yet i was under the impression that 1 was keeping a good lookout. Aud vice versa. I sometimes saw the object long before it was reported and at the same time could see the look-out man walking to and fro, and therefore supposed he was not asleep. After a number of suck happenings, being of an analytical turn of mind, I set out to discover tiie cause, but it was a long time before it ultimately dawned on me that instead of keeping a good look-out it was a case of dreaming, with the eyes wide open, but blind to surrounding happenings. By the way, that deduction' probably explains much of tne contradictory evidence so bften given at enquiries into the causes of collisions and other accidents tliat Happen at sea.

I consider that what 1 have conclusively proved shows ( the weakness of the nightwatehman system, an inherent delect, impossible to eradicate in sentient man on solitary night watch for hours at a stretch. There are also other delects in the system, in that generally speaking, mghtwatchmeu are old, even decrepit and sometimes partially disabled men unequal to the activity required in case of an outbreak of lire. In all, the nightwatchman system is the cause of

many “late calls” that nightmare of all fire brigade officers .and one of, if not absolutely the worst feature of fire brigade work for them. No matter how efficient the brigade may be, the “late call” too often results in heavy, even disastrous loss and wiping out for years the average of good work performed by the brigade. And what is the remedy? We have it at hand in any one of the several efficient auto-detector systems now on the market, or in the still more effective combination of auto-detec tor- sprinkler system, that not only gives the alarm but also extinguishes the fire in its incipiency. Any of these systems directly connected to the local fire brigade station, properly installed in the first place, then maintained in good order are always on watch, day and night, never tired, never dreaming, ij.nd have abundantly proved their reliability as a means of preventing large fires and serious losses. ,

It is claimed, and placed on record, that one of these combination detector and sprinkler systems has, throughout the world, extinguished 28,000 fires with, including water damage, an average loss of under £6O per fire and t to come nearer home, in Australia and New Zealand, has extinguished 243 fires at an average loss of £95 per fire. In regard to the solus auto-detector systems. Giving evidence before the Royal Commission on Fire Prevention, sitting in London, according to the report published in 1923, the manager of the Associated Fire Alarms Co., submitted the following record: The value of property protected by the company’s alarms steadily rose in ten years from 29 millions in 1911 to 48 millions in 1920. Total premiums received in the ten years: £1,616,000; total fire damage for ten years: £42,720; percentage of fire damage to premiums, 2 i per cent., as against a fire damage of 51 per cent, of the premiums received on property not protected by automatic alarms. This, as shown by the records of twelve of the leading British insurance companies, and it should be understood that these records apply to earlier years when the automatic systems were not as perfect as they ax*e today and further, that auto-detector and sprinkler systems are only installed in the larger and more risky establishments, particularly such as cotton and flour mills and other extensive factories and manufacturing plants, that, with their inflammable contents, are most subject to outbreaks of fire and where a “late call” would mean great loss and perhaps destruction to neighbouring buildings as .veil, in that