The Daily News. THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 1912. THE FIRE EPIDEMIC.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 247, 18 April 1912, Page 4

The Daily News. THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 1912. THE FIRE EPIDEMIC.

Xo country in the world lias so many fires as New Zealand, and in the south lately there has lately been a new outbreak. These visitations come in cycles, like measles, and no effort is made to wipe out the allegation that the New Zealander is exceedingly careless. He is careless because it is only once in a long while that he is called on to explain the cause of a fire. The first question is not "Was the lire preventive?" but "Was the loser well insured?" If there were fewer insurances there would be fewer fires. Tf the insurance companies insisted on a more minute inspection of risks and a more complete and careful valuation of insurable property, the cycles of fires would dwindle. It is not suggested that even a moderate proportion of the exceedingly large number of fires in New Zealand are the work of incendiaries, but it certainly is suggested that the authorities take so little heed of them that the lack of system induces a profound carelessness. They manage these things differently elsewhere. In Germany, Belgium, Holland, France and Switzerland the authorities assume that if a fire has occurred somebody was reponsible. -It is a fair and reasonable assumption. Every fire is the subject of an enquiry, not alone by the fire insurance societies, but by the police authorities. It does not matter to the police authorities whether the person who was the cause of the fire was criminal or merely careless. If ho is. careless he is punished. If he is criminal, then the ])unifOmw!iit is greater. The excuse generally put forward in extenuation of the number of fires in New Zealand is that in general the dwellings of the public are of a more flimsy and inflammable nature than the dwellings to be found in other countries, if new American towns are excepted. Under the Continental system, if a house were burnt, eareiful enquiries might lead to the certainty that bad chimney construction was tho cause. The man who built the chimney would be justly held responsible for the fire. In New Zealand (and New Plymouth is no exception) there is a growing desire-among speculative, persons to put as many atrociously ill-built houses on to the smallest possible space. Congestion is very dear to the owner of town allotments. No municipal body in New Zealand cares twopence about this question. 'Building by-laws are, flagrantly disobeyed every day, the result being that New Zealand is the worst "built" country on the face of the earth, and consequently provides food for fires. Any man with a saw and hammer is his own Architect. It is not known, and it certain the authorities are too tired to ascertain, how much defective building has aided conflagrations. The danger to life and limb does not escape the authorities. Municipalities taught by a fire in a big rattletrap boardinghouse are simply careful thereafter to order flimsy fire escapes to be put into new timber death-traps. One might as well throw a lifefbtroy to a floating log as attach a fire escape to many modern weatherboard match-boxes. Investigations into fires either do not take place or they are incomplete. In every case, whether the fire occurs in a private or a public building, every person in it at the time, or having anything to do with it, should be minutely examined. There is frequently blame to be attached to someone, and if the blame were sheeted home in a couple of dozen cases there would be greater immunity. Inflammability is not the only contributing cause of the excessive number of fires. Benzine cannot be inflamed without a fight. While every authority in New Zealand is placidly supreme about fires, the suspicion that not every fire is accidental will grow. The knowledge that "a good fire" has given many a struggler a start in life is a reason why fewer men should be given an opportunity to "make a rise," either liy accident, carelessness or

design. Nearly every time the fire brigade is called to a fire someone has been responsible and blameable for it. Th« authorities do not take this view. They seem to imagine that houses burst into flame spontaneously. We hold that a law should ex'st whereby the occupier 01 owner 01 a building that has been burnt shall prove that he has not been either careless or criminal. Powers might be delegated to the municipalities to make the necessary enquiries and attach th« requisite blame. Until some system in devised apportioning blame the crop of fires will grow. As soon as the authorities regard a fire as seriously as they regard inebrity, theft or other breaches of the law, so soon will a new era of carefulness dawn in a land which is in many things supremely careless, but abnormally so in the matter of Are prevention.