1928 — Feb 10, Vaporizer explos./fire, Beacon Oil Co. Refining Plant, Everett, MA — 14
Compiled by Wayne Blanchard; last edit 2-15-2025 for upload to: http://www.usdeadlyevents.com/-
— 14 Bridgeport Telegram, CT. “Fire Victim Dies.” 2-22-1928, p. 13.
— 14 National Fire Protection Assoc. Spreadsheet on Large Loss of Life Fires (as of Feb 2003).
Narrative Information
Feb 10: “Everett, Mass., Feb. 10 – (INS) – This city was shaken this afternoon by an explosion at the plant of the Beacon Oil Company. Fire followed the explosion….Boston and Revere sent fire apparatus to the scene.” (Olean Evening Times, NY. “Several Employes Reported Injured in Plant Explosion.” 2-10-1928, p. 8.)
Feb 11: “Everett, Mass., Feb. 11. – While a large force of workers tonight searched the tangled ruins of ten stills at the Beacon Oil company’s refining plant here for more bodies, state authorities took steps to investigate the explosion and fire which wrecked a unit of the plant yesterday with heavy loss of life. The list of known dead still stood at 12, although it was believed that other bodies lay hidden under the debris. Four injured workmen were in a critical condition at a hospital. Several men employed at the plant were missing….” (Charleston Gazette, WV. “Twelve Known Dead.” 2-12-1928, p. 4.)
Feb 11: “Boston, Feb. 11 (AP) – A sweeping investigation into the cause of the explosion and fire in the plant of the Beacon Oil Co., in Everett yesterday in which at least 12 persons lost their lives will be made by officials of the state fire marshal’s office, Marshal George C. Neal, announced today. As soon as witnesses can be summoned an inquest will be held, he said. The state fire marshal expressed the opinion that the disaster should not have occurred had proper care been taken in handling the explosive materials used in the business and he said all officials and employes who might have any information bearing on the explosion would be summoned to appear at the inquest….‘There is an unusual amount of oil stored there. While as yet we do not know the cause of the explosion I believe from the experience I have had in such matters that the fire could have been prevented.’….
“Throughout the night, firemen, policemen and other workers tirelessly searched the smoking ruins for additional bodies while sobbing groups of relatives besieged main gates of the big plant in quest of information…
“Mayor James . Roche, this city’s youthful executive, took personal charge of the situation and announced that he had summoned a conference for today to decide on investigatory steps. Roche was personally acquainted with several of the dead and many of the injured. As he entered the devastated area at the head of a searching party he stumbled over the body of Collins, an old fried….
“Mrs. Martha Landrigan, mother of four children, who had been early cheered by mistaken information from firemen that her husband was safe, collapsed when his body was identified….
“Gilligan, another of those killed, left a wife and six children, the youngest of whom was born a week ago.
“President R. B. Kahle of the company declared that the explosion probably was caused by the failure of a low pressure still. The affected stills formed one unit in a total of 25 in the plant which covers a tract of 50 acres on the bank of the Mystic river opposite Charlestown.
The first blast came with a roar that was heard in cities for miles around and almost immediately a gigantic cloud of thick black smoke spurted upward. Within a few minutes five alarms summoning help from half a dozen nearby cities had been sounded and the entire area was shrouded in the gloom of the oil pall through which jets of flame leaped 200 feet into the air.
“Fire apparatus was rushed from Malden, Medford, Chelsea and Boston to help check the spread of the flames which for a time threatened a battery of 10 storage tanks each containing 40,000 gallons of oil. A company fire brigade of 250 men joined with the regular firemen in battling the spread of the burning liquid in the direction of those tanks.
“Preliminary investigation indicated that most of the dead and injured probably had been at work in the boiler and machine shops adjacent to the first still which exploded. Both of these buildings were leveled by the blast and fire. In the plant’s office, several score of clerical employes became panic stricken and one girl was knocked unconscious in the rush for exits. Fellow workers returning when it became apparent that the building was in no danger, found her in that condition and she was taken to a hospital to be revived.
“Early arrivals on the scene included half a dozen priests and twice that number of physicians who were summoned by the management. Several priests risked their lives to bring absolution to the dying or joined in the work of rescue. The physicians set up an emergency hospital where the slightly injured were treated and an attempt made to ease the pains of those more seriously hurt until ambulances could take them to hospitals.” (Lowell Sun, MA. “State Fire Marshall to Investigate Explosion…Probe of Blast and Fire in Plant of Beacon Oil Co. in Everett – At Least Twelve Persons Dead.” 2-11-1928, pp. 1, 5.)
Feb 13: “Everett, Mass., Feb 13 – (AP) – The permit of the Beacon Oil co. to do business here was revoked by the board of aldermen tonight in direct consequence of last Saturday’s destructive fire and explosion which cost the lives of 12 workmen and sent more than 35 others to hospitals. Action was taken under the fire prevention statutes of 1925 which the aldermen construed to give them the right to recall any license which they had granted without concurrence of either the council or mayor. The vote was unanimous….In anticipation of an appeal by the concern the aldermen set a public hearing for March 1.”
“The Beacon Oil Co., is one of this city’s largest industries, its plant covering a tract of 100 acres on the banks of the Mystic river. The plant has been the scene of a number of fires and in recent years local residents have vigorously opposed its further expansion. When in full operation it employs about 600 persons.” (Lewiston Daily Sun, ME. “Revoke Permit of Beacon Oil Company.” 2-14-1928, p. 1.)
Feb 21: “Boston, Feb. 21 — (By Associated Press.) The death list from the explosion and fire in the plant of the Beacon Oil company in Everett on February 10 was increased to 14 today when William Kirk MacVey of Tewksbury died at the Massachusetts General hospital from the effect of burns received during the fire. MacVey was an electrician and at the time of the explosion was working on the pumphouse. He jumped through the flames.” (Bridgeport Telegram, CT. “Fire Victim Dies.” 2-22-1928, p. 13.)
Masscases.com: “A party alleging exceptions to rulings by a judge of the Superior Court at a trial has the burden of showing by his bill that error was committed upon a point properly raised by exception.
“A party saving an exception to an instruction in a charge to a jury must apprise the trial judge in some way of the particular in which he contends that the instruction is erroneous.
“Upon exceptions saved by the plaintiff at the trial of an action of tort against a corporation engaged in the business of oil storage and refining for personal injuries caused to the plaintiff by reason of an explosion at the plant, the record was bare of suggestion that the plaintiff at the trial relied on the theory of res ipsa loquitur,[1] or on any theory except one, which was stated by the judge in his charge, without an exception being saved by the plaintiff, to be the theory relied on by the plaintiff; and the plaintiff made no request at any time to have the charge modified in any way, or to have the case submitted to the jury on the theory of res ipsa loquitur.
“The plaintiff alleged an exception to a portion of the charge as follows: “The mere fact that the vaporizer exploded is not evidence that the condition of the vaporizer was improper or defective, or its operation improper or negligent. If the explosion came from some cause undetermined, some cause not determinable in evidence, the defendant is not liable. The plaintiff offered evidence of no other cause for the explosion than that which I have earlier stated; briefly, that hot oil came in contact with water at the bottom of the tank. So you will have to determine here whether or not the cause of the explosion was what the plaintiff claims. If you do not find that, then your verdict must be for the defendant.” In this court the plaintiff argued that by such instructions he was deprived of the right to go to the jury upon the theory of res ipsa loquitur. Held, that
“(1) It did not appear from the bill of exceptions that the trial judge had reason to believe that the plaintiff, by such exception, intended to reverse the theory of his case and the course of the trial and for the first time to present the case as one to which the rule of res ipsa loquitur applied;
“(2) The plaintiff had not sustained the burden of showing that error was committed;
“(3) The exception was overruled.
“TORT. Writ dated May 23, 1928.
“In the Superior Court, the action was tried before C. H. Donahue, J. Material evidence and exceptions by the plaintiff are stated in the opinion. There was a verdict for the defendant [Beacon Oil] and the plaintiff alleged exceptions.
“G. I. Cohen, for the plaintiff.
“E. J. Sullivan, for the defendant.
“LUMMUS, J. On February 10, 1928, there was an explosion in the oil storage and refining plant of the defendant at Everett, which injured the plaintiff a fifth of a mile away. The jury, in response to a question submitted to them, found that the explosion was not caused by negligence for which the defendant is legally responsible, and returned a verdict for the defendant. The case is here on exceptions to the charge.
“One exception is to a statement in the charge that there was no evidence of any defective condition in certain specified machinery. As to this, it is enough to say that the bill of exceptions fails to show any inaccuracy in what the judge said….
“Exceptions overruled.” (Masscases.com. “Ev Anderson vs. Beacon Oil Company. 281 Mass. 108, October 3, 1932 – November 28, 1932, Middlesex County, pp. 108-112.”)
Liveauctioneers.com: 1931 New York Yankees Team Autographed Beacon Oil Co. Benefit Game Baseball, inscribed in black ink “Longest Home Run ever Hit in Everett, Beacon Oil Benefit, Aug. 9, 1928 by” with ink signatures including Lefty Gomez, Bill Dickey, Babe Ruth, Johnny Allen, Art Jorgens, Tony Lazzeri, Cy Moore, Arthur Fletcher, Dixie Walker, John…, Lou Gehrig, Joe Sewell, Herb Pennock, Earle Combs, and Charles (Red) Ruffing, and (Red Sox) Dan MacFaydon, the ball stamped with James W. Brine logo, “Official League Ball,” and with red and green stitching.
“Provenance: Obtained by the father-in-law of the consignor, an Everett native and ball player. The game benefited the families of those killed in the February 1928 explosion at the Beacon Oil Co. at Everett, Massachusetts. Approached by Everett Mayor Roche and Red Sox Manager Bill Carrigan, both Babe Ruth, and Lou Gehrig agreed to play alongside Red Sox rookies and an Everett minor league team.” (Liveauctioneers.com. “1931 New York Yankees Team Autographed Beacon Oil Ball.”)
Sources
Bridgeport Telegram, CT. “Fire Victim Dies.” 2-22-1928, p. 13. Accessed 3-22-2013 at: http://newspaperarchive.com/fullpagepdfviewer?img=12346214&sterm=everett+explosion+beacon+oil
Charleston Gazette, WV. “Twelve Known Dead.” 2-12-1928, p. 4. Accessed 3-22-2013 at: http://newspaperarchive.com/fullpagepdfviewer?img=40367310&sterm
Lewiston Daily Sun, ME. “Revoke Permit of Beacon Oil Company.” 2-14-1928, 1. Accessed at: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1928&dat=19280211&id=h7IgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ImkFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5852,3259861
Lowell Sun, MA. “State Fire Marshall to Investigate Explosion…Probe of Blast and Fire in Plant of Beacon Oil Co. in Everett – At Least Twelve Persons Dead.” 2-11-1928, 1.
At: http://newspaperarchive.com/fullpagepdfviewer?img=61630111&sterm=beacon+oil
National Fire Protection Association. Spreadsheet on Large Loss of Life Fires (as of Feb 2003). (Email attachment to B. W. Blanchard from Jacob Ratliff, NFPA Archivist/Taxonomy Librarian, 7-8-2013.)
[1] In the common law of negligence, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (Latin for ‘the thing itself speaks’) states that the elements of duty of care and breach can be sometimes inferred from the very nature of an accident or other outcome, even without direct evidence of how any defendant behaved.” (Wikipedia. “Res ipsa loquitur.” 2-25-2013 modification.)