Fire Marshal Bill Opposed
While he feared that it was too late to take action, Director Porter, of Philadelphia, announced that he had asked for a hearing at Harrisburg to protest against the State fire marshal’s bill pending before the State senate after having passed the house. He characterized the bill as a mischievous one, for the reason that it would wipe out the fire marshal’s office in Philadelphia and place it under the jurisdiction of the State fire marshal. With it would go the fire prevention commission, and the city would have to do business with an official in Harrisburg, 150 miles away. Director Porter said the hill had been called to his attention by William I. McDowell, building commissioner of Pittsburgh, who had asked his co-operation in fighting it. The passage of the bill, the director said, would undo all the beneficent work that had been accomplished since the fire prevention commission had been instituted. The State fire marshal, under the amendment applying to cities of the first class, would have authority to appoint several large-salaried assistants and an unlimited number of deputies at a salary of $5 a day and an additional fee of 25 cents for each fire investigated.