Letters to the editor
部门
School Fire Safety
To the Editor:
I have been following with great interest the many articles appearing in FIRE ENCINEEIUNG on school fire protection since the Chicago School fire, in particular the current Round Table discussion, as well as a very enlightened article by Professor Gerald L. Maatman entitled “Misconceptions Concerning Safety of Life From Fire,” in the October issue. This last article is by far the most perceptive and discerning that has appeared in FIRE ENGINEERING within my memory concerning this subject.
Because of the misconceptions nationally rampant relative to life safety from fire in schools and other high life-hazard occupancies, I would like to state my position for the record. It concerns two principles which have been recognized by most enlightened members of the fire service for as long as I can remember.
The highest form of fire protection that can be afforded a high life-hazard occupancy such as a school is the installation of a complete “approved” automatic sprinkler system which is connected to an interior fire alarm warning system and also connected to the municipal fire department alarm system.
上述防火保护的唯一其他必要的辅助功能与专业消防部门本身一样古老。这是一个古老的单一出口代码，在某些情况下显然已经看不见了。它要求，我引用：“每层公共建筑的每一层都应至少有两种或更多独立的出口手段彼此远离并延伸至等级。”
I believe that there is no substitute or alternative for the foregoing and I challenge anyone to successfully refute my stand.
Sincerely yours,
JamesM.布雷特
Chief of Fire Department
Kingston, N.Y.
National Fire Defence Plan
To the Editor:
I read the editorial in your November issue with great interest, and I see that you, speaking on behalf of the United States Fire Serivce, came out strongly against any nationalisation of your fire service in the defence plan of the nation.
The nationalisation of the British Fire Service was carried out in the teeth of fierce opposition from the service itself, and even now I suppose there are many professional fire officers who are opposed in principle to any return to national conditions. We were nationalised in the stress of war at an extremely awkward time during enemy attack, but I do not believe that any really intelligent fire officer thinks other than a National Fire Service is an absolute necessity in the over-all defence plans of a nation.
毕竟，在过去的50年中，战争的条件发生了很大变化，以至于一个国家不再在家庭阵线上安全。实际上，这似乎可能是未来的战线。因此，消防部门的民防成为国家的第四部队，陆军，海军和空军是其他三个部门。当然，美国没有专业的消防员可以考虑一支狭och军，海军或空军。这些服务不可能在地方当局上运作。您会告诉我您如何期望消防服务，在未来战争中对其他三个力量同样重要的角色，在地方一级成功运作？
We have been through it all before. We opposed it as you are now doing. We were wrong, and I hazard a pretty shrewd guess that you are very wrong now.
Sincerely yours,
k . n .霍尔m . I.Fire E.
Chief Fire Officer
曼彻斯特消防队
Manchester, U. K.
