“A Powerful But Not Very Reputable Body”?
It would be hard to figure out by what course of reasoning the chief counsel for the Lockwood housing committee of the New York Legislature arrived at his conclusion that the National Board of Fire Underwriters is a “very powerful but not very reputable body.” Possibly he has judged the board by some of its reprehensible (?) acts, such for instance as the standardization of hose couplings, enabling towns to assist each other in emergencies of conflagration. Or perhaps the suggestions to citycouncils by the board as t.o the advantages lying in uniform and strict building codes looking toward safe fire construction and its providing an outline of such a code free of charge swayed the counsel’s opinion. Again, perchance, he had reference to the action of the board in sending its engineers to test the newly-purchased apparatus of fire departments, thus insuring to the cities the best of fire fighting appliances.
One has. only to turn to the war record of this iniquitous (?) organization to realize what it has done. Thousands of plants engaged in war work were inspected repeatedly and hundreds of suggestions which were responsible for the saving of many millions of dollars through fire prevention were made by the board s inspectors. The formation of Conservation Associations in many parts of the country was the direct result of the board’s activities.
But why prolong the catalogue? It would go on almost indefinitely, in showing up. the hoard’s iniquities (?). Suffice it to say that the National Board has been placed in a much better light before the public by the dignified reply of Mr. Mallalieu than has the Uockwood Committee by the unwarranted attack of its chief counsel.