The Portland daily press., 1898-12-13
THE FIRE BOAT AND THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT.

The hue and cry which is beidg
made over the action of the COM
nsittee on fire department in the case
of Capt. Goud of the fire boat is
entirely without reason. The decision
that the committee came to was the only
one that conscientious, intelligent and
honorable men could come to under the
evidence submitted to them. The Chief
Engineers charges were as follows:
first-Negleet of duty in not respond
ing to an alarm of fire from box 43 on
December 9Th.
sSecond-Refusing to obey an order
from the chief of the fire department. at
the fire of the same date and box.
*Third-Neglect Of duty in not re-
spending to an alarm Of fire from box 81
on December 3. -
The first charge was disproved by the
testimony of two witnesses whose evil
dence was uninpeached-Wi William E.
Carter and Capt. Goud. The former
testified that hs was oneIof the first at the
fire, and that when he got there the fire
boat already had a stream on and was
playing on the buildings on Portland Pier,
which were in danger. Capt Goud says
that when he heard the alarm he and his
fireman got up and dressed in a hurry
and started for the freboat and got o
stream on the buildings Oh Portland Pier
as soon as it was possible to do SO. He
asked his engineer if he could get steam
enough to drive her round to Custom
house wharf and the engineer replied that
he did not think he could.
This testimony was uncontradicted. 1t
acquits Capt. Goud completely from the
charge of not responding to the fire alarm.
He did respond and got to work even be-
fore the land engines.
The third charge was neglect Of duty in
not responding to an alarm from box 81.
The evidence on this point showed that
the failure was due to the indicator, and
that Capt Goud was not to blame; and
the committee so found. They could not
have possibly found any other way with
out ignoring the evidence.
The second charge" Refusing to obey
an order from the Chief of the fire depart
ment''-is the one that has given rise to
most of the agitation over this case.
During the fire the chief engineer of the
fire department ssnt instructions to Capt.
Goud to take his boat round to the east
side of Custom House wharf Captain
Goud replied: cit Is impossible in this
hurricane to get the boat round to that
fire. This, it will be seen, was not
refusal to obey, but 81 IMPLY declaration
that it WIS impossible to obey. Suisse
quently the chief engineer again instruct
ed Capt. Cloud to take his boat around to
the east side of Custom House wharf,
s'even if he sunk her, Capt. Goud re-
piled again that it was impossible, that
if he got his boat out into the stream she
would be blown up to Portland bridge.
Both of Capt. Goud's replies negative any
intention Of defying the chief or ignoring
his orders. He did not try to do what he
was told to simply because he believed that
the result of doing SO would either be the
destruction of his boat or the blowing of
her so far from the fire that she could be
of no use whatever.
40 doubt he was guilty of disobedience,
and he admitted so much. Was that
tlisobedience justifiedS We hold that
in view of the responsibilities that de-
yolved upon Capt Goud under the law
and the circumstances of the case he was
justified fully and completely, always