The usual basis for comparison of fire losses is that of the per capita figures, presumably because this method is the simplest and most readily applied. The common impression that per capita fire losses in the United States are very much higher than those in European countries is correct. This comparison is based largely on data collected prior to 1914, since during the war years conditions in France and Germany and to some extent in England and Italy, were such that no fair comparison was possible, and, in fact, few fire loss figures were obtainable. Since the war, the rates of exchange in many European countries have been so abnormal and fluctuating that comparisons are difficult, and again few figures are available.

For the three years 1912 to 1914 inclusive the per-capita losses, from reports of the Committee on Statistics of the National Board of Fire Underwriters, are as follows:

Statistics for some of the years 1912 to 1914 from a few cities in other European countries correspond generally with those quoted above.

Figures for recent years show an increased per capita loss for European cities, as also for the United States and Canada, of about 50 per cent.

The increase in fire losses in the United States since the period of ten years ago is accounted for in large part by the great increase in per capita wealth. The Census Bureau reports indicate a per capita wealth of $870 in 1880, when there was a population of about 50 million, and of $3140 in 1920, when there was a population of about 106 million. Any comparison of fire losses in this country with those abroad must be interpreted also in the light of the relative property values subject to destruction by fire.

An interesting discussion of this subject by Charles E. Worthington will be found in the Quarterly of the National Fire Protection Association for January, 1923. Mr. Worthington correlates, for the United States during the period 1870 to 1921, the figures on population, combustible wealth per capita, total fire loss, per capita loss and fire tax rate; this last figure he defines as the relation of fire loss to total combustible property values, expressed in dollars of loss to thousands of dollars of property value. The value of combustible property is estimated at 80 per cent of the National wealth as given in the census reports.

Our stock of burnable property was about 9 times as great in 1920 as in 1876, increasing from about $29,500,000,000 to about $265,000,000,000, as compared with a fire loss only five times as great and a population two and one-third times as great. The increase in property values is remarkable, but will be readily understood in view of the changes in living conditions and the appreciation in cost of all sorts of commodities, especially in the past few years. The figures show a steady increase in the per capita loss, ranging from $1.87 in 1870 to $4.24 in 1920, while the "fire tax rate" has fallen in the same period from $3.01 to $1.69, reaching a peak in 1893, the year of the panic, when the rate rose to $4.06 per $1000.

Mr. Worthington also compares the per capita property values in Italy and the United States, observing that the average Italian in 1920 owned about $584 worth of burnable property as against our average of $2512. Consequently, if each burned at precisely the same rate per $1000, our per capita loss would still be four and a half times as great as his. As a matter of fact our per capita loss is about ten times as great as that of the Italian, and we must account for this, after allowing for the variation in property values, by the differences in building construction, in the methods of living, in the extent of domestic and industrial fire hazards, and in the laws and the popular attitude toward them in relation to personal liability for fires.

In other European countries a similar comparison may be made, although there is not the same variation in national wealth. In Great Britain, for instance, the per capita fire loss is a little less than one-fifth of ours, their per capita wealth nearly as great as ours, and the "fire tax rate" a little more than one-fifth. We must account for their better record by their greater and more effective observance of fire prevention principles.

Those who have made a study of the laws in European countries relating to personal liability for fires find it easy to account for the difference in mental attitude on this subject here and abroad. In this country, as has been often said, a fire is regarded as a misfortune and the man who has one receives sympathy. In most European countries any fire is regarded as a crime and they investigate and punish the man who is guilty of causing it; he may be the tenant or the landlord, the builder or the architect, but some one is held responsible, not only for the loss on the property in which the fire originates, but also for that on adjoining properties to which it may spread. The fundamental difference in the code of laws is that in their case a man is held guilty until he can prove his innocence, while in ours exactly the opposite is true. The Code Napoleon, the code of laws which prevails especially in France and Belgium and which forms the basis for the modern law in most Latin countries, contains two sections reading as follows:

Article 1382. Every person is responsible and liable for any acts of his by which any other person has or may have sustained any loss, damage or injury. Article 1383. Every person is responsible for any loss, damage or injury caused by his own act, carelessness or negligence.

In German cities there is an immediate investigation of the cause and circumstances of a fire, followed by a rigid inquiry and the imposition of a penalty upon those who may have violated the laws for safeguarding against fires.

The United States Consul in Charge of the Consular District of Frankfort, Germany, has recently submitted an interesting and undoubtedly typical report on the fire protection and fire record of that city, which has a population of 465,000.

The number of fires per year is about 470, whereas in a city of that population in the United States, any number of fires less than about 1800 per year would be classed as moderate or low. fire department in Frankfort comprises 277 men. with about the same population, has 711 men in the active fire fighting force.

The municipal Newark, N. J.,

The rare occurrence of serious fires in Frankfort is due to a great extent to the strict enforcement of regulations, which prohibit the erection of buildings over 72 feet in height, prescribe materials of construction, the storage of hazardous substances, and the con

struction of stairways, exits and lighting installations. Neglect to conform to the building and fire regulations renders property owners subject to heavy penalties.

The obvious and final solution of our fire waste problems consists then, in attention to construction features involving use of fire resistive materials, limitation of heights and areas, and protection on vertical and horizontal openings in buildings; the installation of automatic sprinkler equipments in buildings of large size, inferior construction or hazardous occupancy; the adoption and enforcement of regulations governing the storage, handling and use of combustible and hazardous materials and the safeguarding of hazardous devices and processes; education of the people as to the causes of fires, and cultivation of the principles of fire prevention and of responsibility for their own acts.

CHAPTER XXVI

CHARGES FOR PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE

The most important functions of public water supplies are the furnishing of a good potable water under satisfactory pressure, for domestic, commercial, industrial and public service; and an adequate quantity of water under reasonable pressure for putting out fires. The latter service is generally characterized as "fire protection service" the more important being the public service, rendered through the agency of hydrants or other fire connections upon the distribution pipe system; and the less general though important private service, rendered through the agency of hydrants and connections to the sprinkler systems of manufacturing and other establishments.

Early history

In the early days of water works building one of two considerations usually controlled in determining the compensation for public fire hydrant service, in the negotiations leading to the establishment of the water works; first, what might be termed "the average nearby rate" or the requirement that hydrant rental and water rates should not exceed the water rates paid in the surrounding district or state, or perhaps in the nearest large city, which found application chiefly in the larger communities; and second, what might be termed the "guaranty basis"— or the requirement that the hydrant rental should be substantially equal to the interest charges upon the necessary investment, leaving the water rates to meet operation, maintenance, taxes, depreciation charges and profit, which found application chiefly in the towns and smaller cities. In short, the demand for water service and the willingness to guarantee the interest upon the necessary investment in plant, controlled rather than any equitable consideration of the cost or value of the service rendered (see Proc. Amer. Water Works Assn., 1911, p. 55).

It was not until about 1910 when studies by the Wisconsin Railroad Commission with reference to the practice within its own state; inquiries made by the United States Geological Survey which cul