Girls Trapped in Flames Lose Lives

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 305, 16 March 1928, Page 7

Girls Trapped in Flames Lose Lives

Hopelessly Inadeq nate Punishment Inflicted FACTORY NOT INSPECTED Serious charges were made at Marylebone Police Court, London, recently. against the Film Waste Products, Ltd., arising out of the fire at the company’s works at Union Wharf. St. Pancras, when five people were burnt to death. The company was accused, at the instance of the Home Office, of: Failing to serve on the factory inspector of the district a written notice containing the particulars prescribed by the Factory and Workshop Acts. Neglecting to keep the means of escape from fire from all parts of the drying room and reeling room free from obstruction during working hours; and Neglecting to remove finished celluloid articles from the workroom. Sir Travers Humphreys, prosecuting, described the fire and the death of four women employees and a foreman. He said that owing to the failure of the company to give notice of the opening of *the factory in July, the factory inspector did not visit the place to see that provisions of the Factory Act were carried out. In addition to the entrance in Redhill Street, there was an entrance from a yard which went straight into the drying and winding room. Without the knowledge of the factory inspectors, a partition was put up near the exit, which left only a 2ft way. This partition clearly would hamper the exit of the girls in the factory in the event of fire, and had its existence been brought to the knowledge of the factory inspectors it would have been most strongly disapproved of. On the day of the fire this 2ft. space was completely blocked by a large wooden case, trapping the girls in a corner. The case contained a large quantity of celluloid on reels, and on top were bales of celluloid. Mr. Du Cann. addressing the magistrate for the defence, said the packing case of celluloid films was there solely owing to the fact that the foreman, who lost his life, was in the outer office making a case to take the films away. lie admitted that the erection of the partition was a bad error of judgment on the part of the company. He submitted that if the inspectors had objected to it they could have done nothing. Mr. Bingley said it was an extremely sad case. In his view the maximum penalties were almost hopelessly inadequate. He fined the company £25 and granted £25 costs.