COST OF FIRE EXTINCTION

Evening Star, Issue 12026, 26 October 1903, Page 8

COST OF FIRE EXTINCTION

In lecturing before the Victorian Insurance Institute on the 14th inst., Chief Officer D. J. Stciu, of the Fire Brigade, made reference to tlio comparisons drawn by the Conference of MumcipaUtics, in their Teport of the previous day, between the cost of the lire brigades of Sydney and of Mdbourne. He pointed out that the cost, of maintaining the Melbourne brisradje had increased from £27,391 in 1892 \o £35,323 in 1902, but that the risks had increased very materially, and the work had developed in proportion, for tlie number of c;vlls to the brigade had risen in the same ten years from 822 to 1,408. In Sydney there had been a great increase in expenditure durinsf tho past five years, which had shown a rise frnni £24.000 in 1899 to an estimate of £45.450 for 1903. The Sydney brigade had been supplied by the Government with its buildings free of coat, whereas in Melbourne a net. amount of £7,000 had to be paid annually as interest and sinking fund on the cost of the buildings, so that, though Melbourne had a population of 7,000 in excess of that of Sydney, the cost of maintenance was far less tliau that of the sister capital. At the same time, be pointed out that the increased cost since 1891

had been fully counterbalanced by the de* crease in the damage done by fires. In 1891 the fires extinguished were thus dassifled: Trifling damage, 53£ per cent.; considerable and very considerable, 25J per cent.; total destruction, 20J per cent. But in 1802, so efficient had the work of the brigade been, the percentages were respectively 85|, 12, and 2£, and tho intervening years showed a gradual increase in the "trifling" percentages, together with a-steady. decrease in flics© of considerable damage and total destruction. It may be added that representatives of the fire insurance companies denied the implication of the municipalities' report that their premiums had been increased bo as to relieve tLem of the burden of their portion of the cost of the fire brigade.. The premiums were lower in Melbourne than elsewhere, and then- share in the expense of maintaining the brigade was saved to them by the losses which its ■work prevented.