Fire

A policy of insurance against Are includes every loss necessarily following directly from the occurrence of a fire.s See Cause, 1, Proximate; Explosion; Insurance; Lightning.

Fire-arm.

A weapon acting by the force of gunpowder.^ See Arms, 2; Loaded; Weapon.

Pire department

A city which is authorized to maintain water-works and a ' fire department, and which collects taxes for those purposes, is not responsible for the negligence of its fire department in permitting private property to be burned. ^ Fire-escape. An act which directs that certain buildings shall be provided with fire-escapes by the "owners," does not apply to an owner in fee, not in possession, who has leased the premises, but to the tenant. Being a penal statute, it cannot be extended by iiyplication to parties who do not clearly come within its terms. ^ Fire ordeal. See Ordeal..Fireworks. Percussion caps, designed for signaling railway trains are '* explosive preparations," within the ijieaning of a statute regulating the keeping of such articles, although they may not be " fireworks " as the latter term is known to commerce.' Set on fire. A statute giving damages against any one who shall " set on fire " the woods of another, does not apply to an accidental firing by a locomotive engine, without negligence.^ See Arson; Necessity; Res, Perit, etc.; Salvage; Take, 8. ' Exp. Watkms, 7 Pet. '574 (1833); Pervear v. Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 480 (1866). As to the power in associations to impose fines upon members, see 27 Am. Law Reg., 370-74(1883), cases.

2 Robbins v. Blodgett, 121 Mass. 584 (1877). * Brady v. North Western Fire Ins. Co., 11 Mich. 445 (1863). ^ 'Atwood V. State, 53 Ala. 509 (1875); Evins v. State, 46 id. 88 (1871); Hutchinson v. State, 62 id. S (1878); Williams v. State, 61 Ga. 417 (1878). « Robinson v. Evansville, 87 Ind. 334, 336-37 (1882): 85 id. 130; 17 B. Mon. 720: 19 Ohio St. 19; 16 Gray, 297; 104 Mass. 87; 123 id. 311; 69 Pa. 420; 88 Conn. 368; 63 Mo. 159; 18 Wis. 8-3; 33 id. 314; 39 Iowa, 575; 51 Ala. 139; Dill. Munic. Corp. § 774. ' Schott V. Harvey, 105 Pa. 222 (1884); Lea v. Kirby, 10 Cin. Law Bui. 449. ' Bliss V. Lilley, 113 E. C. L. 133 (1852). s Missouri, &o. R. Co. v. Davidson, 14 Kan. 849 (1875).