TECHNICAL EVIDENCE HEARD AT DUNEDIN FIRE INQUIRY

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29138, 25 February 1960, Page 15

TECHNICAL EVIDENCE HEARD AT DUNEDIN FIRE INQUIRY

(New Zealand Press Association)

DUNEDIN, February 24. Technical evidence by electrical engineers was given today on the third day of the inquiry into the fire at the premises of Arthur Barnett, Ltd., on December 9. Most of the evidence dealt with theories concerning electrical faults and possible origins of the fire, which gutted the store. Called by Mr D. L. Wood, counsel for Arthur Barnett, Ltd., and the Otago Retailers’ Association, John Henry Marett, an electrician, said that wiring in the building was in good order before the fire. It had been inspected and passed by the Dunedin City Council inspector a few weeks before.

Any examination -of the basement installation was prohibited after the fire until December 11, because of water in the area. Representatives of the council, the insurance underwriters and fire board accompanied him on the inspection, said the witness. “All present considered the fire must have originated elsewhere,” he said. The Commissioner (Judge Rothwell) suggested counsel might save time in cross-examin-ation if there were experts in agreement on the question of electrical causes. Mr Wood said that though it

was generally agreed among the experts that there was no possibility of the fire having started at the switchboard, there was conflict as to whether it was an electrical fire.

Raymond James Maindonald, a consulting electrical engineer, said he had tested part of a cable which had been connected to the main switchboard. Mr Wood: If the fire in the basement was caused by anything but electrical reasons, how long would the fire have to burn before an electrical failure would result? The witness: More than 20 minutes. He added that he considered that the fire was sudden.

Although the various stages of the rebuilding of the premises complied with the by-laws, the complete building did not comply with the existing fire safety regulations, said Charles Thomas Morgan, chief city building inspector. The council had allowed some latitude as far as floor areas were concerned, provided there was a fire alarm approved by a fire brigade. John Sydney Terry Smith, a builder, said he was associated in the rebuilding programme which started in 1950. As far as hd was aware the rebuilding complied with the building regulations, and he had discussions with the council authorities. Tenders were called for fire alarm installations, and he had been told to seek expert' advice on the various systems. He went to the central fire station and spoke to a man who he thought must have been a senior officer. The officer had said the sprinkler and automatic systems were both quite efficient, but recommended the automatic type. This system had been installed under the supervision of members of the brigade.