The sun., 1918-07-23
FEWER FIRES, BUT HEAVIER FIRE
LOSS IN THE UNITED STATES.
Reduces tho Number Of Bazes; CONGREGATIONS Increase
Damage Carcessness Open Enemy

read with much interest the arti-
Gle in THE SUN Of July IS under the
heading THE Dilution Of Labor as a
Cause Of More Fires" 1t is q thought
full analysis Of a puzzling problem, but
the heading is unfortunate, because
there are not more fires, but fewer, MOI
docs the article. at any point, say there
are more fires, or even intimate that
there are more fires.
Even fire preventionists are prone
to forget that the criterion by which
the success of their efforts L. to be
judged Is not the diminution of losses
but the reduction of the number OF
fires. For instance, in Cincinnati, be-
! ginning with 1912, there was a steady
reduction in number Of fires from
more than 1900 in that year to less
/ than 1000 in 1917. There was also a
| progressive decrease in amount OF
losses from more than a million and
half in 1912 to less than half million
in 1916: but in 1917, Notwithstanding
a decrease in number of fires, few
| large fires forced the loss total for the
city to $1,011 .000-more than double
the total for 1916.
| OF the approximately 1000 fires dur
ing 1917 there were only 81 in which
the loss was more than $1,000. SO far
as loss was concerned, the careless
ness Of the 81 had more than nullified
the carefulness OF the more than 900 /;
| but can you deduce from this that fire
prevention effort Is useless because
less than per cent OF those having
| fires are so careless that they put
an unwarranted burden on $4,000
people through high insurance rates?
| What Is true Of Cincinnati is true
of virtually every city and State in
the country. Within the last few days
| have seen reports covering entire
| States. showing that though there
| were fewer fires by hundreds in 1917
| than in 1916, the a-1rage loss per fire
was hundreds Of dollars. in some in
stances thousands of dollars, greater.
| The report for the entire country
| shows the same condition.
In 1917 approximately $4,000 fires
were reported to the Actuarial Bureau
of the National Board-a number vast
enough to stagger thinking citizen
but it marked decrease of approx
mately 32, 900 from 1916, when the ac-
tual number was 361 SAG. Yet losses
were so much heavier in 1917 than In
1916, an increase of s3S,615.295, that
the fewer fires last year caused losses
averaging $179,50 greater than the
year before.
This does not mean that these are
all the fires; they are only those re-
ported by virtually all the stock COM
panies and a few of the mutuals to
the Actuarial Bureau. But IL there is
a decrease in the number so reported
probably there Is a similar decrease In
the number of those not reported
Possibly they represent third of the
total number of fires, but the loss
figures-s2S7 .373, 140--probably repre-
sent 90 to 95 per cent. of insured
losses and so per cent Of the total
losses of the country. The thousands
of farm mutuals, nearly all OF the
mutuals writing only one class-re-
tail druggists. retail grocers, &c.-the
| inter-insurers. reciprocals, &c, do not
report to the Actuarial Bureau. and
probably they have as many fires as
the companies that do report, but
|
1t is reasonable to assume, therefore,
that the 361,642 fires reported to the
Actuarial Bureau in 1915 reflected q
total OF more than $4,000 fires in
IDENTIFIED by insurers of various
kinds. and that the 1000 reported in
1917 similarly reflected a total of 65S,-
900, a decrease of about per cent. for
the year.
| As insurance losses are generally
held to represent about three-fifths
OF the total direct fire loss, it Is not
unreasonable to assume that the pro-
portion holds good in the total number
Of fires. on this basis. we would have
| a totaI--insured and uninsured-of
| 1905, 900 fires for the year 1915. and
still carrying out the proportion
| ,096, 900 in l9l7--a reduction OF 109.-
600 for the year
On this basis we are confronted with
more than million fires-even in a
year of inn rovement- which, broadly
speaking, represent almost as many
cases of individual or group careless
hess with respect to fire hazard, or
neglect OF fire control provision, or
| both.
In other words, 5000 fires daily are
sappng the prosperity Of the country
and retardinG the winning OF the war,
even in a year in which Fire Proven
ton seems to be making little real
progress.
In all conscience this aggregate.
even though only an estimate, is i'm
pressive enough TO arrest American
thought-to hold the attention of our
people without diverting it by such
side issues as volume of losses, enemy
| incendiarism. or ''dilution Of labor
even at a time when labor" seems 10
hold the centre OF the stage. At a
conservative estimate 80 per cent OF
all fires are due to carelessness or
neglect in some form, and II Is an open
question II large portion OF the re-
| siduum are not similarly caused. II we
could only identify the causative
agency. If there Is enemy incendiar-
ism to material degree. the same
care and vigilance which are neces-
! sary TO combat sleeping fires-elmi-
nate hazards--are capable of nullity-
! ing the, efforts of the enemy inCen-
diary. All that is required is another
form of application OF the same prin-