Government Regulation and Citizen Safety: Three Books Reviewed

• Jurisdiction: United States,Federal
• Citation: Vol. 32 No. 2
• Publication year: 2019
• Author: By Marc Alexander
• topic: Construction Law,Product Liability Law

Government Regulation and Citizen Safety: Three Books Reviewed

By Marc Alexander

Marc Alexander is a mediator and litigator at AlvaradoSmith APC. He authors California Mediation and Arbitration (www.calmediation.org) and is a co-contributor to California Attorney's Fees (www.calattorneysfees.com). He is a member of the California Litigation Editorial Board.

Dark Tide: The Great Boston Molasses Flood of 1919, By Stephen Puleo

The Poison Squad: One Chemist's Single-Minded Crusade for Food Safety at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, By Deborah Blum

The Fifth Risk, By Michael Lewis

Our government has been described as an insurance conglomerate and a large army. A core function of government is identifying and managing risk to protect the public from harm. The thread tying together the three books under review is government's ability to manage risk. Dark Tide, about a horrific industrial accident, has been reissued in time to mark the 100th anniversary of the great molasses flood of 1919 that killed 21 people and devastated the North End of Boston. The Poison Squad, about the efforts to protect the public from dangerous and adulterated food, focuses on a heroic public servant. And, The Fifth Risk is about contemporary neglect, incompetence, and short-sightedness in federal agencies.

Dark Tide. United States Industrial Alcohol (USIA) was under great pressure to complete a tank for the storage of molasses by the end of 1915. Earlier that year, a German U-Boat sank the RMS Lu-sitania, and alcohol, which could be manufactured using molasses, was an important ingredient in the manufacture of munitions.

USIA built a tank in the North End of Boston, a block from the harbor where ships could unload molasses. Measuring 50 feet in height and 90 feet in diameter, the tank held 2.3 million gallons of molasses. On January 15, 1919, the tank exploded, sending forth a tidal wave 25 feet high, 160 feet wide, travelling at 35 miles/hour. Steel and rivets exploded into projectiles. Railroad elevated tracks collapsed. The waterfront was devastated. Basements were inundated. A reporter wrote, "Horses died like so many flies on sticky fly paper." Men and women suffered the same fate.

Author Stephen Puleo explains how the unsafe tank came to be built in a congested neighborhood, why and how it exploded, the damage it caused, and the ensuing legal battle. He also places the local Boston story against a wider backdrop of prejudice against the Southern Italians who lived in the North End, discrimination, racism, xenophobia, and lack of political power.

Placing the tank near a railroad spur leading to processing facilities, and near the harbor, made logistical sense. Regarding management's decision about choosing a site, Puleo argues: "Two overriding realities no doubt played a part in their thought process and ultimate decision—social attitudes toward Italians and a lack of political participation among Italian immigrants to control events in their own North End neighborhood.... The plight of North End Italians emboldened USIA to construct its mammoth molasses tank in Boston's most congested neighborhood."

[Page 27]

Corporate cost-cutting and urgency also played a part in management decisions leading to safety compromises. The tank originally was to be fully water tested for leaks. However, Arthur Jell, the corporate executive in charge of construction, decided to water-test only up to six inches of the fifty-foot tank, refusing to authorize the expense of tapping into the municipal water supply to fill the tank. The city inspector did not need an engineer's certification for the tank. Plans were not submitted to any architect or engineer. At...