THE FATAL FIRE AT SYDENHAM.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 9735, 25 May 1897, Page 4

THE FATAL FIRE AT SYDENHAM.

The Sydenham Borough Council seems very unfortunate in choosing the direction in which to carry out. its economies. A short fciuie ago it sought to lessen the cosfc of its scavenging , at the expense of the health of suudey residents on the South belt—with what disastrous results is well known. It now further appears that in its endeavours to save the cosfc of fire prevention within the borough, it is placing both the lives and the property of the ratepayers in continual peril. We like to see pubiio bodies careful in theii* expenditvt-3—it is a somewhat rare virtue—but in both these instances the Sydenham Borough Council have given us a conspicuous example of " how not to do it." The Coroner's jury who sat yesterday to enquire into the sad circumstances of the late fatal jfire did quite right in urging that the Sydenham Council ought to make better provision for the prevention of fire. At present that body pays the Chrisccuuron City Council £100 a. year for the use of one engine. This being the agreement, the City Council naturally objects 'to more than one engine attending a fire in the borough unless a guarantee is given for the extra cost. The maintenance of its Fire Brigade costs Christchurch £1400 a year, and Sydenham canuofc expect for £100 a year to command the services of the entire brigade and the whole or its plant. Having lately been foiled in an attempt to poison sundry Christchurch citizens by creating a nuisance on the Christchurch boundary, the Sydenham Council has the less claim to sponge on the good nature or charity of Christclmrcb. city in the matter of putting out its fires. It is only fair to say that in this particular instance there was no evidence that the lives of the poor woman and her child who perished in the flames could have been saved even if all the City Corporation's appliances had been used. There is no question, however, that tbe parsimony of the Sydenham Council has led to the unnecessary destruction of valuable property in the past, and may lead to the loss of still more valuable live 3in the future. It is quite time, therefore, that some more efficient arrangement were come to. '.'■■■•■