Home | Award Event | Photos 1 | Photos 2 | Photos 3 | Photos 4 | Photos 5

 On the occasion of the IEEE Milestone being awarded

 to the

Boston Electric Fire Alarm System 1852

 Friday, October 1, 2004

8:30 am

Florian Hall, 55 Hallet Street, Dorchester 02124

Free Parking

EVENT PHOTO PAGES

The Fire Alarm Telegraph System of Boston
Its Origin, Development and Contributions

Evolution of the Fire Alarm Control Center (pdf)

Boston's Electric Fire Alarm System (pdf)

1. Summary

The IEEE History Center carefully reviewed the milestone nomination package submitted by the Boston Section last year and it decided to award electrical milestone status to the Boston Electric Fire Alarm System. This award is not given lightly as you can gather by reading the plaque carefully:

On 28 April 1852 the first municipal electric fire alarm system using call boxes with automatic signaling to indicate the location of a fire was placed into operation in Boston. Invented by William Channing and Moses Farmer, this system was highly successful in reducing property loss and deaths due to fire and was subsequently adopted throughout the United States and in Canada.

Historical and electrical engineering facts considered to grant the fire alarm telegraph system of Boston the status of IEEE milestone are presented in this article. We will explain the origin of those little red boxes everyone has seen on street corners, at public schools and commercial buildings. We will also briefly describe the system and its major circuits and components, and go over how the fire alarm system worked.

The fire alarm telegraph system of Boston was revolutionary when it was built over 150 years ago.  It was the first fire alarm system and became the model for other American cities to follow. The original system design principles were brilliant and pervasive.  Although the design was continuously refined over time, the principles remained essentially unchanged, forming the basis for today’s public fire alarm systems. Many of the original concepts evolved into national fire alarm standards which were adopted by the NFPA - National Fire Protection Association.

2. Key Players

There are two key players associated with the development of this municipal fire alarm telegraph system, William Channing and Moses Farmer. Channing reminds me of Steve Job, founder of Apple Computer; Farmer is like Steve Wosniak, Apple’s pioneer  hardware guru.

William Channing was born in Boston on February 22, 1820. His father was a prominent  and influential Unitarian minister. He died February 22, 1901, on his  eighty-first birthday. He went to Harvard and graduated from the medical school of the University of Pennsylvania with a medical degree. He never practiced that profession, presumably finding  electricity more rewarding.

Moses G Farmer was an electrical engineer who became a prolific inventor of great ability. He was born on February 2, 1820 at Boscawen, New Hampshire. His father was a farmer and prosperous lumber merchant. He died at Chicago while attending the World’s Fair, May 2, 1893. Moses was educated at Philips Academy and Dartmouth College. He worked as a telegraph operator, as superintendent of a telegraph company, and as teacher. He invented an electrical bell striking machine used in Boston’s system. He also invented some of the early Boston instruments, such as the automatic testing clock. He was a member of the AIEE, predecessor of the IEEE.

3. Conditions Before 1845

To appreciate and understand the significance of this nomination, go back 150 years and put yourself in the shoes of William Channing. He recognized how poorly Boston responded to fire emergencies. Bell-ringers ran to their assigned church steeple, firemen with their engines ran wildly about the streets, and citizens panicked.

Stephanie Schorow, in her new book entitled Boston on Fire, captures the scene of frustration, chaos and confusion during a breakout of a fire:

 “From colonial days to the early 19th century Bostonian knew that the best defense against a fire was getting on the scene as quickly as possible to halt its spread. People shook wooden rattles or simply called for help, something referred as “hallooing a fire.” Citizens -  and later volunteer firefighters – would respond by grabbing axes, buckets, ladders and other gear and race towards the direction of the halooing. A fire foreman leading the charge might use a speaking trumpet to bark directions; eventually trumpets became the very symbol of firefighting and a silver trumpet was often a fitting reward for a deserving firefighter.”

The mayor of Boston summarized the existing fire alarm problem this way:

 …” the old method of communicating alarm was very imperfect, arising from the fact that an alarm being given by ringing one bell at the northerly part of the city would frequently, in consequence to the wind or other causes, be first heard at South Boston, or at the extreme South End, and it was impossible to say which of several bells struck the first alarm. There was no possible way of communicating to the ringers of these several bells where the alarm originated, or the fire existed. The engines, therefore, were rushed out of their houses at random, without any direction or knowledge as to the fire unless it was an extensive conflagration and would show itself; the result of which was that the fire made great headway, and there was great destruction of property, in consequence of this delay of the arrival of the engines.” …. Mr. Wightman’s testimony. Reference 6.

Channing understood the basic principal of fire fighting which was simply this – get to the fire quickly before the fire breaks out and spreads. Everybody understood this, even playwright William Shakespeare: “A little fire is quickly trodden out. Which, being suffered, rivers cannot quench.” ..Henry VI pt.3

4. Channing’s Landmark Article

In 1845, Channing presented his vision for a better way of dealing with fire emergencies to a local newspaper. The article described his systems engineering approach to the problem which involved better communication, better coordination, with centralized control. Systems engineering is a branch of engineering concerned with the development of large and complex systems, where a system is understood to be an assembly or combination of interrelated parts working together toward a common objective. Although not large or complex by today’s standards, Channing did address something big and new. This article is worth studying because of its powerful functional requirements, and brilliant solution to the fire alarm problem. We’ve transcribed the entire article and highlighted important parts in the next paragraphs. The article was entitled “Morse’s Telegraph for Fire Alarms” and appeared on page two of the Boston Advertiser and Patriot,  June 3, 1845:

There is a highly important application of the Electro-Magnetic Telegraph in which public attention has not as yet been directed. This is its use in our cities to give an instantaneous, universal and definite alarm in case of fire. The peculiar properties of the Telegraph – rapidity and precision of  communications -  are in this instance pre-eminently needed. Almost all cities, except Boston, have felt the necessity of maturing, to some extent, signals indicating the existence and direction of a fire. In this city there has been great negligence in this respect, and the result is that our engines are sometimes obliged to run wildly about the streets and return home without reaching the place to which they should have been directed. But even in New York and Philadelphia, where some plans have been taken by means of the peculiar tolling of the bells to indicate the direction of a fire, an alarm is communicated slowly and uncertainly.

By a very simple application of the Electro-Magnetic Telegraph, those evils may be avoided, and the means obtained of giving immediate and precise information throughout the city on any alarm. Let there be a central office in one of the public buildings, from which shall proceed a double wire, passing over the top of the houses successively, to every engine house and fire bell in the city, and returning again to complete its circuit, to the place where it started. In each engine house or other station, thus created, let there be one of Morse’s registers, recording permanently any impressions communicated to the wire, and giving at the same time a sufficient warning or alarm. Let there also be a key in each station, by the simple depression of which, the appropriate signal will be mechanically communicated on the wire, and sent simultaneously and without time to every other station in the circuit. The telegraph system being thus established, on the occurrence of a fire, information would be carried at once to the nearest station, and the intelligence would then be instantly known throughout the city by means of the simplest mechanical signal.

Instead of having a single great circuit, it would be an easy modification of this arrangement to have five or six circuits, proceeding each to different districts of the city, and each ……..(newspaper is not legible at this point) ………. from the central office to each station. To allow communication backwards and forwards from a number of stations, two small galvanic batteries alone would be needed, and these would be naturally placed at the central office.

The agent at this office would have it in his power to communicate directions to all the stations, and every alarm of fire might be made to pass through the central office before being communicated to the stations generally. There is indeed no end to the useful modifications of which this design is susceptible. There is, however, one which deserves to be especially mentioned. By a slight change of the arrangement at the alarm bell stations, and an increase of machinery, the hammers of the bells could all be disposed so as to strike mechanically on the communication of a galvanic impulse from the central office. The agent would therefore be enabled, by depressing a single key with his finger at certain intervals, to ring out an alarm, defining the position of the fire, simultaneously on every church bell in the city. By combining this system of alarm with the more precise one previously given, there would be hardly anything left to wish for.

My object has only been by giving the details of such an arrangement, to show to every scientific man it’s practicality and simplicity. It’s first expense would be but a few hundred dollars, hardly reaching to thousands, which would be saved probably during the first month of it’s operations. The chief objection to it would be the danger of the interference of mischievous individuals with the wiring passing over the houses. In New York and Washington, however where wires are similarly placed, no such difficulty has occurred. They could moreover be protected by law, and a number of circuits be employed, taking different routes, by which it would be impossible to intercept the whole. Supposing this last however to be affected, we should still be left in no worse condition then at the present.

I suggest this project to the consideration of the authorities of the city, on this account especially, that Boston has been and is entirely behind hand in her arrangements for spreading alarms of fire, and would thus have an opportunity of retrieving her character, by taking a step in advance of other cities.

The landmark article was signed simply with the letter C.

What was going through his head as he wrote this? Is it really far fetched to say that Channing had a vision of today’s modern public fire service communications system - the 911 emergency system?

Channing saw the telegraph as a way to bring information about fires to the brain of the city, which he called the central office. He believed the conventional Morse’s telegraph was linear, a way to bring intelligence in a straight line between two points, A and B. The municipal telegraph system he envisioned was different. Not only would it be owned and operated by the municipality, but the system would be two dimensional, encompassing the entire town with telegraph keys distributed throughout, providing coverage across a wide area.

I was most interested in reading about Channing’s strong functional requirements, and his unwavering design principles. Perhaps that may explain why his ideas worked for so long, over 150 years. His important ideas were:

1. that there be instantaneous, universal and definite alarms. Universal meant general purpose or wide spread; definite meant trustworthy, dependable or certain.

2. that there be rapid and precise communications.

3. that there be a central office from which double or redundant wires would depart from, then daisy chain from station to station, finally looping back to central office to complete the circuit.

4. a telegraph key for each alarm station, whereby by simply depressing the key, you send the appropriate signal to every station in the circuit. Channing uses the word ‘mechanically’ meaning that code signals are sent by turning a crank of some sort, not by keying lengthy telegraphic coded messages.

5. an agent, an operator, is designated to communicate, control, or coordinate the fire department’s response to fire emergencies.

6. information about an incident of fire is transmitted system wide.

7. aware of human nature, he proposes that there be a permanent record for each alarm.

8. system design is flexible  to accommodate different circuit arrangement.

9. by depressing a single key, the agent rings out a general alarm defining the position of the fire simultaneously on every church bell in the city.

10. touches briefly on reliability or security issues, a major concern since circuits would be vulnerable over rooftops and strung out on poles.

History does not document what led to Channing’s interests and obsessions. Presumably he personally witnessed the breakout of fire in his neighborhood. Being a real innovator, William Channing spent a lot of time refining his ideas based on the application of Morse’s telegraph. Not only was he first to conceive of a complete fire alarm system, but by 1851 he was determined to see his ideas become reality.

5. Proposal to the City of Boston

On March 27, 1851 he delivered his historic proposal to the mayor of Boston. The proposal was 28 pages long with a colored illustrated map plotting out the proposed signal and alarm circuits. The proposal had all the elements of a modern engineering proposal: objectives, technical requirements, operations, equipment description, schematic diagrams, construction cost estimate, installation schedule, licensing of Morse’s patents, staffing recommendations, plus a brief estimate of annual operating costs.

He broke down the emergency response problem into two steps: first, getting citizens to report fires by sending a signal to a central office; then alert fire stations and get firemen moving smartly to the scene of the fire. The proposal is quite clear as to what the system functional requirements are: In Channing’s own words:

1. “instantaneous communication  of the intelligence of a fire”

2. “means of striking a definite alarm”

3. “security against interruptions of communications and alarms”

4. “security against false alarms” and

5. control of fire department resources under one agency

The telegraph would provide rapid and instantaneous communications. But the proposal promised much more than that. Just the telegraph alone wasn’t going to convince skeptics, especially those with bad experiences involving  telegraph service or malfunctions. As we shall see later, the telegraph was only one of many components in the system. He wanted rapid communications, but he also wanted a system that was dependable. Paraphrasing what Channing said in one of his lectures, the fire alarm system would have to provide unerring certainty of operations because the public would rely on it for emergencies. “Instantaneous, universal, and dependable” were his guiding design principles. He knew that if his innovation was going to be accepted by the public, then it had to work correctly at all times.

The word availability is often used with the development of critical and emergency systems. Availability is a measure of the degree to which it is operable at the start of a mission when it is called for at a random point in time. Channing used “unerring certainty of operations” to convey the same meaning.

Signal Stations: 26 signal stations were initially proposed. These proposed signal stations were expected to be mounted indoors, under lock and key with a sign reading -  “In case of fire the key may be found at_________”.  Watchmen and business owners would have had access to these boxes. Moreover,  the proposal is vague about how the signal station was suppose to work. Presumably it was going to be mechanically quick and easy. Signal station would cause its circuit to open and close, signaling the district and box  number to a remote central office, thereby  alerting the agent on duty who would translate the dots and dashes.

Alarm Station:  19 alarm stations were proposed.  Each alarm station would consist of a custom built bell striking machine. Bells weighted anywhere from 300  to 3700 pounds. Bell striking machines would be located in church steeples all over town. These machines were going to be electrically actuated by individual electric solenoids, presumably connected to a 24 volt battery. The central office operator would depress the alarm pushbutton, thereby energizing the district alarm circuit causing all of the bells to strike in unison. Getting five or more bells of different sizes to ring simultaneously was not going to be an easy task. This interesting electro-mechanical problem is discussed at length by Bosch in Reference 7.

Central Office: City hall was proposed as a suitable location for a command post. Batteries, instruments, control pushbuttons, telegraph registers, and so on, were to be located there. An agent, an operator, would be posted there 24 – 7. Upon receipt of a signal for help, he would dispatch fire engines to the scene. Firefighters on the scene would use the nearest signaling station to communicate with the central office by keying telegraphic messages using the signal key.

Circuits: Two  classes of circuits were proposed: signaling circuits and alarm circuits. These two classes of circuits are illustrated in Reference 2

To prevent interruption of service due to broken conductors, each circuit had to be in duplicate. Each circuit was connected from station to station then looped back to central office, also improving reliability. Interestingly, separation of redundant circuits was discussed to guard against common mode failures. Separation was a way to guard against circuit tampering, or falling ice and snow, from affecting both circuits simultaneously.

Ground return was not to be used because an accidental connection made between the wire and ground would complete  an ‘open’ circuit, or affect part of a ‘closed’ circuit He also imposed strict controls over the  installation and arrangement of conductors.

The proposal specified periodic testing of circuits. This may not have been a novel idea since the telegraph industry did routine testing of circuits. Routine tests on circuits help detect failures early so repairs may be made. The proposal specified that periodic test be carried out automatically.

6. Construction of the First Fire Alarm Telegraph System

Soon after successful completion of initial trials, the City of Boston appropriated  funds to complete the project. A special committee was appointed to oversee the installation. Moses Farmer was appointed superintendent of construction and licenses were obtained from Samuel Morse for his patents. Actual outside work began on September 7, 1851.

The following paragraphs describe the system that was actually constructed, which deviated somewhat from the proposal. But first, the basic elements of the fire alarm system will be explained using the electrical schematic drawing submitted with the Channing and Farmer patent application.

The telegraphic fire alarm system consisted of three basic elements as illustrated in the US patent diagram:

• A – signal station

• B – central station (same as central office)

• C – alarm station

As previously mentioned, there were two distinct types of circuits: signaling circuits which connected signal stations to the central station; alarm circuits which connected the central station to alarm stations. Conductors were installed in duplicate as shown by items I’s & k’s and EE’s & DD’s. The patent covered two categories of circuits, the series connected and the open type circuit. Originally, signal circuits were open type, but this was changed to series by connecting Morse’s keys in series, which was standard practice in the American telegraph industry. On the other hand, alarm circuits were open type, with solenoids connected in parallel.

Districts: The city was divided into six zones or districts. Each district was connected by three signaling circuits and three alarm circuits.

Wiring: The fire alarm system consisted of 23 miles of single signaling and alarm circuits. Each circuit was made up of #8 and #10 conductors, Swedish iron, strung out alongside of buildings and supported on glass insulators. 50 poles were used between buildings. Since each circuit was run in duplicate, the total circuit length in miles was 46. Its unclear whether these wires were insulated or not. Werner says they were not, however Channing stated that conductors had to be insulated numerous times in his writing.

Signal Stations:  The number of stations actually installed was 41. This apparatus is illustrated in figure 4 of Reference 3. Boxes were distributed as follows:

• North signaling circuit had 18

• South signaling circuit  had 16

• South Boston signaling circuit had 7

Signal stations were attached to walls of building. They were cast iron boxes, sealed and made water tight, much like today’s boxes except painted black instead of red.  Each box had a lightning arrestor, a writing magnet and armature, a weighted hand crank, a toothed code wheel and a spring key. The signal key was available for sending messages by hand using Morse code. Signal stations were made to work correctly, but only after repeated design changes. The final design that lasted till the 1860’s, consisted of a hand crank attached to a gear connected to the code wheel. Turning the crank turned the code wheel which actuated the spring key, making and breaking the circuit. The code wheel first transmitted the district number by a series of dots, then the  station number was transmitted in telegraphic character which included at least one dash.

Alarm Bell- Striking Machines: 19 bell-striking machines were installed. This apparatus is illustrated in this article. Alarm circuits were distributed as follows:

• North alarm circuit -  3 miles long with 8 bells

• South alarm circuit - 5 miles long with 9 bells

• South Boston alarm circuit - 6 miles long with 2 bells

The Central Office:  was located in one of the rooms in the city building at Court Square and Williams Court. It housed the following apparatus -

• triple receiving magnet with alarm bell  (see illustration)           

• a district keyboard for striking the district number of the alarm bells (see figure 6)

• triple alarm Morse register

• circuit testing clock with audible alarm for testing every hour

• switches, keys and accessories

• electrical batteries for the signal box circuits were in the same building

• water driven dynamo for alarm circuits

All conductors in the interior of the building, including those entering and leaving the building through the roof, were installed in gas pipes. 48 single conductors poked through the roof of the building.

After construction was partially completed, Farmer was appointed superintendent of operations, a position he held for about two years while improving the system. After a long trial and error period, the municipal fire alarm system was turned over to the city and placed in service, April 28, 1852. Permanent operating staff included the position of superintendent, an operator, and an electrician.

7. System Performance

For the first few years after completion, failures and malfunctions continued to plague operations. Eventually, Farmer’s hard work paid off to the extent that the system was declared fully operational and placed in service. By 1854 Channing and Farmer were ready to apply for a joint patent. This section will explain how well the system accomplished its mission.

Firemen’s acceptance of the new system was very important. At first, firemen were opposed to the new system, but their attitude changed as system reliability improved. Also, citizens’ complaints decreased drastically with the completion of frequent adjustments and retests of local church bells.

There is evidence that Channing was very pleased with the system’s performance. In a lecture to the Smithsonian, he reported that firemen had learned to operate fire alarm  equipment properly. During fire emergencies, firemen would cluster around the nearest street box to find out which street box number initiated the alarm, thereby finding out where the fire was. At the scene of the fire, men stayed in touch with the central office, either waiting for instructions or reporting their status.

System reliability also improved. In one year, central office recorded only 12 false alarms out of a total of 195 fire calls. Six of these alarms had been initiated by citizens who later admitted acting prematurely; the remaining six were due to unknown causes, that is, random failures. Over the years, great improvements have been made to reduce failure rates to very low levels, consistent with today’s expectations.

Soon after 1854, similar fire alarm systems were installed in various cities. These performed successfully,  judging from expert testimonies given before the Commissioner of Patents in 1857.

The Commissioner tried to put a monetary value to Channing and Farmer’s invention:  “That this invention is valuable and important would seem to me to need no demonstration. Witnesses find it difficult to set a money value upon the invention; though they all agreed that the annual saving to the country in consequence of the invention, is many millions of dollars, besides many human lives.”

The chief engineer of the fire department of Newark, New Jersey, testified as to the benefits:  “ I believe it is a great advantage to the people of Newark, and during the last year it has saved from $30,000 to $50,000 in losses, by giving quick alarm.”  “Every minute saved at a conflagration in providing the means of extinction is regarded by fire engineers as of the utmost  important. This expresses my opinion as to the value of time.”

Another expert in the business reported:  “the great importance of the telegraph is of using so much less of our engines than we would under the old system.”

A final measure of the system’s performance, was the success it achieved all across the country. By 1857, the Channing and Farmer fire alarm system had been installed in New York, Cincinnati, Detroit, Albany, New Haven, Mobile, St. Louis, Chicago, and nearly forty other cities and towns, including Montreal.

8. Landmark Features

Communication Centers

The first control center was illustrated in 1852. The room was photographed soon after the invention of photography as seen in the accompanying figures.   Then and now, functions by the fire alarm operator have not changes:

The communication center is the building used to house the central operating part of the fire alarm system; usually the place where the necessary testing, switching, receiving, transmitting devices and power supplies are located. In 1851 Channing emphasized the importance of this center:   “It is necessary, in the first place, to have so important a system under the control of some department or agent of the city  government and to provide for intelligent direction at its Center”.

This control center was essentially unchanged 50 years later, except for improvements in hardware which Bosch wrote about in Reference 7: “The general plan of a modern central office fire alarm system stills resembles that outlined by Dr. Channing, fifty-two years ago; but, in the instruments and apparatus used, most wonderful improvements have been made.”

Receipt and Transmission of Alarms

NFPA Article 9.5 specifies that recording devices are necessary in each communications center to automatically receive and record all alarms from street boxes. Additional provisions include:

• a device for producing a permanent graphic recording of all alarms, trouble and test signals

• a permanent visual record and an audible signal shall be required to indicate the receipt of an alarm. The permanent record shall indicate the exact location and time the alarm was transmitted.

• a minimum of two separate means of transmitting alarms to the fire stations shall be provided.

These topics were addressed by Channing. Alarms were to be automatically received and recorded at the central office. Instruments were necessary to give a permanent visual record and to alert  the operator of each incoming alarm. Early recording instruments, crude by today’s standards, indicated the exact location from which the alarm was transmitted.

Channing wanted to prevent human errors and eliminate false alarms, critical topics covered by the NFPA. In 1851, Channing proposed that alarms be transmitted by ‘machinery’; today we use computer assisted dispatching systems with carefully designed hardware and software. In his own words:  “It is necessary also to provide means to complete the Circuit of the alarm bells with perfect regularity and at perfect intervals, which would be impossible, except by machinery placed at the Central Office.”

Fifty years later in the late 1890’s, Adam Bosch, AIEE member,  noted that instruments to prevent human errors and false alarms had evolved considerably:  “In central offices equipped with new apparatus within the last few years, every safeguard is provided to prevent mistakes in the transmission of alarms. With the first blow on the gong from a signal box, a cylindrical indicator revolves and exposes the number of the circuit from which the signal is being received, as well as the number of every box on that circuit. The operator may therefore while counting the signal set the transmitter, and with one glance at the printed record of the register, and another at the circuit indicator, verify its correctness and have the alarm in process of transmission within five seconds after the completion of the first round from the box.”

Monitoring for Circuit Integrity

NFPA specifies that wired circuits, upon which transmission and receipts of alarms depend, shall be constantly monitored, or supervised, to give prompt warnings of conditions adversely affecting reliability. Monitoring shall be accomplished automatically. Monitoring apparatus also provides a record of the condition of the circuits at stated periods of time. All monitoring for integrity of box circuits shall be provided with a visual and audible means. Any conductor failure in the installation, such as open or ground faults, can be automatically indicated within 200 seconds.

Channing in 1851: “ It is essential to have systematic means of testing all the circuits employed in the Fire System. Where a closed Signal Circuit is used, an interruption from any cause, gives of itself a Signal at the Central office. Where an open circuit is used, as it is in connection with the Alarm machinery, other means must be employed.”

Reliability Features

Judging by the many NFPA articles governing system design and installation, reliability is more demanding than ever before. We will mention just a few features involving system reliability:

• Interconnection means shall be arranged so that a single break or single ground will not cause an alarm signal.

• An open, ground, or short circuit fault on the installation conductors of one alarm circuit shall not affect the operation of any other alarm circuit.

• Two separate means for transmitting fire alarms

8. Conclusions

In 1925 Boston’s  central fire alarm office was relocated to new headquarters on the Fenway in Boston, the site currently occupied. At the time, the new facility was well publicized in engineering journals as well as in a commemorative brochure by the Gamewell Company. Their brochure is included in this submission because of historical photographs of the facility.

There are approximately 1500 fire alarm boxes in service in the streets throughout the city and over 1200 master boxes in public and private buildings. The system still operates independently of telephone and electric utility lines and has an uninterruptible power supply.

Today in Boston, telegraphic principles are still used but only in street boxes. When you depress the lever, accessible through a small door, you initiate  a spring-wound clockwork mechanism which transmits a code number to the central station. Alarms of fire are transmitted to all firehouses over the telegraph system just as they have for the last 140 years. Before the advent of the two-way radios, striking alarms over the fire alarm telegraph system was the only means of alerting fire companies. The fire alarm office also communicated with fire companies at the scene of a fire via the telegraph system using Morse code. Boston fire alarm operators continued using Morse code until March 1988, at which point a modern digital system went into affect. However, the old red street boxes still send signals telegraphically.

That the fire alarm telegraph system contributed to the well being of Boston is self evident. It gave people a way to get help quickly and automatically at the outbreak of fires. Although there are three types of transmission systems in use today, telegraphic, telephone and radio communication, much of the original hardwired technology, methods and procedures still apply. For that reason, the fire alarm system of Boston deserves to be recognized as an important IEEE milestone.

[ Home ] [ Award Event ] [ Photos 1 ] [ Photos 2 ] [ Photos 3 ] [ Photos 4 ] [ Photos 5 ]

Copyright © 2005 IEEE Boston Section. All rights reserved.
Maintained by R M Stelting

Updated: November 26, 2007.