TOPICS OF THE DAY.
IN a communication recently received from W. Morrison, builder of fire apparatus in Toronto, Canada, he says: “I notice your correspondent, 'Hydrant Chuck’ of Boston, thinks they have discovered something worth while in increasing the capacity of their chemical engines to onehalf inch streams in place of one-quarter inch. I have lately built and delivered to this city a chemical engine that will maintain two one-half inch streams. Will forward you photographs.” We have received the photographs, and can say that they represent a substantially built machine that is, apparently, capable of doing much excellent work. The writer says : “ I desire to express my approval of your expos6 of the chemical hand grenades. You discharged your duty to your readers, and if any of them are victimized by purchasing hand grenades after the substantial objections you clearly proved, they deserve to lose their money. There is really nothing in them, owing to the great chance that even an expert thrower will fail to hit the mark in the excitement of a fire, to say nothing of the flames not occurring in a convenient place to have something to break the bottle against. I have seen expert operators, in giving exhibitions, fail to break the bottles.” Testimony to the same effect is accumulating daily. It only requires a moment’s consideration to convince anyone that these grenades are impracticable. Fires seldom occur in clear, open spaces, but combustion usually begins in some odd corner that it would be impossible to reach with a hand grenade. Then there is the probability that the bottle will not break and release the compound, so that one might as well throw a brick into the flames. As vve have said before, the compound is an excellent fire extinguisher, but it can be better applied with a bucket than by these blue glass delusions. The public should be warned against trusting them for fire protection to the exclusion of other appliances. They are specially recommended for mills and factories, and here is just where they should not be trusted alone.
火在当前年所遭受的损失en simply astounding, the record thus far not having been equaled since the great Chicago conflagration. The Insurance Chronicle, the recognized authority on this subject, is responsible for the statement that, provided November and December are as destructive as the other months have been, the losses for 1884 will exceed $128,000,000, a sum never readied in any year that did not witness a great conflagration, like that of Chicago or Boston. Such an enormous waste of property should attract the attention of our statesmen and political economists, and impel them to seek for the cause of this wanton waste, and to see if a remedy cannot be applied. Firemen and underwriters know that carelessness and recklessness are the chief causes, but the public does not appreciate all the facts of the case. A year ago the National Association of Fire Engineers asked Congress to cause the statistics of fires to be gathered by some competent person, to be appointed for that purpose, in order that the facts might be presented to the people, under the belief that if the masses knew what they were suffering from this cause, a greater degree of care would be displayed in the protection of property. But Congress failed to take action in the matter and nothing has been done. This question of fire losses is rapidly becoming one of so much importance that it cannot long be ignored by our legislative bodies. If it was simply the destruction of so much property, it might be submitted to —the country, possibly, could afford to throw $100,000,000 into the ocean every year if it chose to do so—but there are contingent losses that equal at least the direct losses, but the actual amount of which cannot be estimated. For instance, the loss of wages and the suffering entailed in consequence, by the thousands of working persons who are thrown out of employment in consequence of the destruction of the mills, factories and workshops wherein they ordinarily find employment; the amounts paid for insurance, made necessary because of the carelessness that makes fires so numerous; in short, there are innumerable ways whereby the prosperity of the country is made to suffer in consequence of the fire losses. It is a low estimate to put the contingent losses at a sum equal to the actual losses, but on this basis, according to the estimate above made, it will amount to $260,OCX),000 this year. According to the statements of statisticians, the net earnings of the entire people of this country run from $400,000,000 to $600,000,000 a year—that is to say, we are reported to be adding to the wealth of the nation at that rate, and it may be stated as being the profit on the labor of the whole people. According to this estimate, we are throwing into the ash heap every year from one-quarter to one-sixth of our profits, and squandering in' contingent losses as much more. It will eventually be found necessary to adopt stringent State or national laws with a view to preventing this enormous waste. The building laws must be made more stringent, so as to prevent the erection of the highly inflammable “ cheap and nasty ” buildings that now furnish so much food for flames, and legal restraints will have to be thrown around the storing of combustible materials in populous districts; some incentive must also be given to propertyowners to induce them to provide proper safeguards against fire. Under our present system of fire insurance they have no such incentive, for the companies will insure almost anything—even “ a powder house in Hades ”—to its full value or more, for a very low rate of premium. The owner is thus made indifferent whether his property burns or not; if it is unprofitable, he is often more than willing to sell it to the insurance companies, and if he does not willfully set fire to it, he becomes so careless regarding it that he might as well apply the torch. Insurance companies should be prohibited by law from paying more than three-fourths of a proved loss, tjius compelling the owner to be responsible for at least one-quarter of the damage resulting from a fire in his premises. This would have a tendency to make him careful, to adopt means of fire prevention and protection, and to see that his tenants were equally careful. Shift the burden of responsibility from the insurance companies to the propertyowner and there will be fewer fires. It is time the subject was receiving the attention of our lawmakers. They will have to consider it sooner or later, and the sooner they do it the better will it be for the country.
