A QUESTION OF HOSE.
Philadelphia has recently been considerably excited over the question of hose for the Fire Department. The Commissioners advertised for 5,000 feet of new hose, and bids were received from several manufacturers. The lowest bid was 70 cents per foot for rubber hose, and the company offering to supply it at that price claimed the award. Hut tho Commissioners, after due deliberation, awarded the contract to the manufacturers of an entirely different kind of hose at SI. 15 per foot, making an excess of $000 over tho bid of tho rubber hose company. This latter protested against the award, appealing to tho City Council for redress. That body referred tho matter to its Committoo on Finance, with instructions to investigate tho matter thoroughly. Meantime the newspapers took sides in the controversy, contributing several profound editorials to the current literature of the day on the subject of Fire hose. At last accounts the mutter wus very much muddled, and likely to loud to litigation, whichever way it was decided.
There is nothing more essential to the successful working of a Fire Department than good, substantial hose. Without it, engines and Firemen are useless, water works aro of no avail, aud all the money expended upon these is rendered a worthless investment. Cheap hoso is dear even if given away, for it is almost certain to burst at a critical moment, when every resource of the Fire Department is taxed to its utmost. Committees charged with the responsible duty of purchasing hose should insist upon subjecting every sample offered to the severest test, and then, having decided which is the most sorvicable, buy that and no other, even if it does cost a tritle more than some other kind. The practice, so commonly followed, of awarding a contract for hose to the lowest bidder is pretty sure to develop into some kind of a swindle before the end is reached.
