Cheviot E'Quakes for 12 months in 1901

During the last few days New Zealand has remembered the Christchurch earthquake. Printed media, radio and television have been full of reminders. Though people who live in Christchurch won't need much reminding because of the personal memories they will carry for the rest of their lives.

It is important that we - the people and our public institutions - don't forget this time. We have quickly forgotten earthquakes that ravaged North Canterbury since European settlement, and failed to learn the need to minimise earthquake risks to people and property.

Nobody alive today has any personal memory of the earthquakes that struck Cheviot over one hundred years ago, beginning with one estimated at 6.9 on the Richter scale on Saturday, 16 November 1901. But newspaper archives reveal stories that resonate today. Or should do. Because Cheviot is located amongst the same cluster of small faults that are causing earthquakes now in Christchurch ..

The First Week...

Issue 7255 of the Star, dated 16 November 1901, carried its first 3 stories about the first sequence of Cheviot earthquakes on page 5. It was a Saturday when the earthquake struck. It's worth remembering that over a hundred years ago, Cheviot was just being settled. Transport was rudimentary. Colonial life was hard. And telecommunications within New Zealand were sparse.

This posting provides links to almost 100 stories that were published in the Star over the next twelve months or so. The links take you to the original archives held in 'Papers Past' at the New Zealand National Library....

The first story was reported from Rangiora, a good distance from the epicentre. Another contains reports of 'great damage' from the Wellington Post Office which had been in communication with Cheviot Post Office...

"...It lasted several minutes. There is not a brick building or chimney left standing. The windows in many houses were shattered to atoms. One little child was killed by a falling house. The bakers' ovens are smashed to pieces and everything in the district is a complete wreck..."

The day's third story is a Rangiora based interview with someone who had been in Cheviot and seen what happened.

Next Monday's Star, Issue 7256, 18 November 1901, carried seven stories on pages 3 and 4. The main story carries sub-headings: Fresh Shocks; Panic-stricken inhabitants; Preparing to leave... The other stories cover: Damage reports in Christchurch and tremor measurements; Drive through Cheviot damage reports; a wonderfully detailed account of damage in Cheviot; an 'Account of springs damage at Hanmer', a quaint account of Magnetograph measurements; and a detailed report of 'earthquake cause and locality by Captain Hutton curator Chch Museum'.

Issue 7257 on the Tuesday following carried 10 stories, including a front page story reporting an average of 3 or 4 earthquakes per hour for the 24 hours following the first major earthquake. It also describes people living under flax bushes because of damage to their homes. The other stories include: a detailed account of Seismograph records in Wgtn ; an Editorial headed: Righteous Object - calling for community support drawing attention to the suffering but noting 'the government cannot do everything'; there is also a long and detailed account of the damage which refers to photos in the current Canterbury Times publication. More nitty gritty stories include: Some settlers destitute. Relief fund; and further accounts of 'Large aftershocks. Nerves strung out...'; a public relief fund emerges 'Public fund from community'; and a constructive 'Suggestion of school used for children sleeping'. The Star carries Capt Hutton again on 'Source of Equake. Size etc'. Hutton is reported as saying, "Canterbury people should be prepared for such shocks in future... they have come before, and are practically certain, sooner or later, to come again.... it is therefore of the utmost importance that every precaution should be taken to minimise the danger to life and property..."

The story was still big in Wednesday's Issue 7258 with 7 stories. Interestingly there is an account about the Cheviot earthquake pictorial issue of the Canterbury Times being sold out and a reprint ordered and advertised. A hopeful mood is reflected in one headline 'only two small shocks in the night'... Another story is of Exodus from Cheviot children and ladies taking the train to Christchurch, a sympathy message from West Australia's premier is published. However the peace and quiet is rather contradicted by another story 'the shock very much upset the women folk....' (which continues here.). The largest story is an account of the visit to Cheviot of the Hon W Hall-Jones - presumably a government Minister. This story includes graphic accounts of damage, and reports that the Government has ordered all its stock of tents to be brought to Cheviot to house homeless people.

Thursday's Star, Issue 7259, only carries 3 stories. But the page 1 story describes the public meeting held in Cheviot with the Minister is very detailed. What emerges in the story is that settlers were very worried that Government might not continue to support extension of rail into Cheviot. Reading between the lines there is concern from settlers - many of them farmers - that their investments would be affected if Government did not ensure good transport links. The views of settlers are reported, as is the Minister's response and promises related to the railway and earthquake relief support. The story ends with reports of a sharp earthquake. A short story headlines: Several sharp shocks, and reports on the continuing exodus of families to Christchurch.

Friday's Star, Issue 7260, contains another advertisement for the next issue of the Canterbury Times, describing the photos to be seen therein. The main story covers: Personal stories with families on Train. "The Fugitives". Reporters had access to refugees arriving to Christchurch. A brief headline reports more disturbances at Cheviot. The euphemism of the day it seems.

Saturday's Star, Issue 7261, dated 23 November 1901, carries 9 articles and advertisements - including another one for the pictorial issue of Canterbury Times. The main story appears to be the one headlined 'More Shocks at Cheviot - Severe Thunderstorm'. Gales and storms added insult to injury to families now living in tents. Some further detail is found in this reporting of aftershocks, and children leaving. It appears that on Saturday, the Star runs a column 'The Week'. This one contains a couple of jokes about the earthquake. Bit on the nose. One was this poem:





'Tis leasehold versus freehold,
But when our houses fall,
upon the slipping land - we seem,
to have no "hold" at all!
And when a yawning fissure comes,
across a tenement,
there is no doubt we have to bear,
A Very Unfair Rent...'

Another story gives an account of a public meeting held in Christchurch City Council about the earthquake and about funding. While another describes damage to schools in the area, especially to chimneys - but not tin ones!

Week Two...

Monday, 25 November 1901. Issue 7262 of the Star carried 4 stories, one of which was about the next issue of Canterbury Times pictorial coverage. Two others were about continuing aftershocks. While a large story 'Facts and Theories' about earthquakes covered a lecture given by WW Collins ion the Lyceum.

Tuesday, 26 November 1901. Issue 7263 of the Star carried just a single story. This covered an account from a Christchurch man claiming the Cheviot earthquake reports had been 'exaggerated' and were 'sensational'. These exaggerations were denied.

Issue 7264, published Wednesday 27 November, describes a 'very bad shock'....and mentions that most residents are still sleeping in the open air...

Thursday's Star - 28 November - contains a graphic personal account reported from a Cheviot 'lady settler'. And a story about a further slight shock and tremors.

Friday's Star reports more shocks in a story where someone blames the moon for the 'disturbances'.

Saturday's Star reports on three more 'slight' shocks and lists Relief Fund receipts.

Week Three...

Monday, 2 December 1901. Issue 7268 of the Star carries a single story. Another shock. No details. You sense that Cheviot is far enough away from Christchurch for this story to be getting a bit stale...

Wednesday's Star is all about the Christchurch Cathedral - which had been damaged by the first Cheviot earthquake (see letter also) - the story indicates that as much as possible of the spire would be pulled down and rebuilt for 'safety reasons'...

The story in Friday's Star headlines 'further disturbances...'

Saturday's Star, in 'The Week' carries another earthquake joke. And announces that the Premier, Mr Seddon is 'in town' and will visit Cheviot.

Week Four...

Monday, 9 December 1901. Issue 7274 of the Star runs a small story about the price of bread in Cheviot hitting 8 pence a loaf because the earthquake so seriously damaged bakers' bread ovens.

Tuesday's Star is all about the Premier's visit to Cheviot. The report details his speech. He apparently spoke for three hours. Covered the rail issue - with some delicacy. He said he'd been much struck by settler comments, who told him they were gratified that the disaster had not fallen on a 'thickly populated place like Christchurch - where the result would have been awful...' There's a human interest story about him having to climb out a window because the door was jammed shut by an earthquake. And there's a small story about the Relief Fund.

Friday's Star carries a story about two more heavy shakes and drizzle.

Saturday's Star, dated 14 December, carries an Editorial about Anniversary day. It dwells on the earthquakes and how they have 'ruthlessly destroyed the fruits of settlers' labour'....


Week Five...

Tuesday, 17 December 1901. Star reports a 'violent shock and tremors'....


Week Six...

Monday, 23 December 1901. Issue 7285 of the Star carries a story about how the Relief Fund will work. How Government will match each pound donated, with 24 shillings, once donations hit the 1000 pound mark....

Tuesday's Star celebrates the donations hitting 1000 pounds....

Saturday's Star, dated 28th December (Christmas has come and gone), carries an 'Anglo-Colonial Notes' story which alludes to a London loan investing in the colony, and worries about the earthquake, and generally seems to dangle the colony...


Week Seven...

Tuesday, 31 December 1901. The end of the year. The dying year editorial marks the earthquake. This story gives a good sense of what else was happening across the colony and in the world at the time.

Friday, 3 January 1902. Issue 7292 of the Star reports a Severe shock at Cheviot. Booming all night. Tremors. New chimneys down (but not the tin ones).

Saturday, 4 January 1902. The Postmaster's report notes further tremors.


February, 1902...

Star , Issue 7318, 3 February 1902, Page 3. Postmaster reports 'very sharp shock and boom'

Star , Issue 7325, 11 February 1902, Page 3. Local and General news that railway works at Cheviot have been halted. Meetings held. Resolutions passed.

Star , Issue 7327, 13 February 1902, Page 1. Front page story. Detailed account of visit to Cheviot by 'The Governor' (Governor General?). He talks rail. But you sense the Government plug being gently pulled....

Star , Issue 7327, 13 February 1902, Page 2. A Local and General roundup includes comments from Cheviot settler, who is reported saying that pulling the rail project will cause more damage than the earthquake....

Star , Issue 7327, 13 February 1902, Page 3. Story notes new shock, and that Govt has put up 1500 pounds as its share of relief fund.

Star , Issue 7330, 17 February 1902, Page 1. This is very full 'Cheviot revisited' story. Describes before and after, and what's happening on the ground....

Star , Issue 7330, 17 February 1902, Page 3. Story reports on account of Cheviot earthquake by Government Geologist.



March, 1902...

Star , Issue 7343, 4 March 1902, Page 2. Story reports more thoughts of Captain Hutton on Origins and Causes of Cheviot earthquakes.

Star , Issue 7353, 15 March 1902, Page 1. A rather odd story about volcanoes and liquefaction.

Star , Issue 7358, 21 March 1902, Page 3. Sir Joseph Ward visits Cheviot and is shown over the wreck of Mansion House.



May, 1902...

Star , Issue 7394, 5 May 1902, Page 4. Odd story about rumours of booming and quakes that didn't happen.

Star , Issue 7399, 10 May 1902, Page 5. Local and General story reports 'sharp shock' at Cheviot.



July, 1902...

Star , Issue 7450, 10 July 1902, Page 2. This substantial story reports a government geologist 'pamphlet' on the 'seismic disturbances at Cheviot' and contains extracts from it about the origins of the Kaikouras.



August, 1902...

Star , Issue 7437, 22 August 1902, Page 2. The Editorial praises the Children's Aid Society, and notes its role during the Cheviot earthquakes.



September, 1902...

Star , Issue 7503, 10 September 1902, Page 3. Story reports, 'no less than six sharp shocks and loud booms'.... headline states: 'settlers alarmed...'

And that was the year of earthquakes for Cheviot and its settlers a little over a hundred years ago.

Faulty Thinking About Christchurch

(NB: Since putting up this post, I have posted further research which you will be interested to read if you want to understand how Christchurch Council planning failed to manage the city's seismic risk: How Councils Under-Played Christchurch Seismic Risk.)... but read this one first....

Maybe I read the wrong newspapers, but around the time of the September earthquake in Christchurch, I got the impression that it came as a very big surprise to all concerned. I got the impression that people thought Christchurch was safe as houses as far as earthquakes went. Not quite the last place on earth for an earthquake, but low risk. Well. That was the impression I got from what I read, and from people I know who live there. How wrong I was.

My last blog on this subject reported a few of my speculative thoughts on the matter, and quoted from the abstract to research by the NZ Institute of Geological and Nuclear Science (NZIGNS), published in Environmental and Engineering Geoscience 1995, and entitled Geology of Christchurch.

It took a while to track down the actual report itself, but I found it buried within the Serials section of the General Library at Auckland University. There are 61 pages of it covering many aspects of the geology of Christchurch and a detailed section on the risk of earthquakes there.

My reading of the data suggests that between 1869 and 1988 there have been 12 earthquakes bigger than 6.0 on the Richter Scale within 150 kms of Christchurch. Two of these were 7.0 and larger. The report contains this photo of earthquake damage to the Cathedral spire from an earthquake in 1888, and reports that the Cathedral was also damaged by earthquake in 1922 (a magnitude 6.9 earthquake centered around Motunau) and in 1929 (the Murchison earthquake). I discovered newspaper reports in the National Library that it was also damaged by the Cheviot earthquake in 1901.

The NZIGNS report tabulates 59 earthquakes that were “felt in Christchurch” between 1946 and 1994 (9 of these were centered outside the central South Island). Interestingly, the report tabulates the intensity of these earthquakes within Christchurch in terms of the Modified Mercalli Scale and the Richter Scale. Modified Mercalli Scale I. Very mild movement, only detectable by instruments. II. Some people feel a slight movement, particularly on upper floors of buildings. Suspended objects such as chandeliers may swing. III. People indoors feel some movement, similar to passing traffic. IV. Motion is felt by most people indoors and some outdoors. Windowpanes and kitchen utensils rattle; parked vehicles rock. The movement is great enough to wake sleepers. V. Felt by all people. Tall objects rock; plaster cracks and falls. VI. Alarmed, people run outside. Poorly constructed buildings begin to show damage. Motion is felt by people in moving vehicles. VII. Only slight damage in well-constructed buildings; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; much damage in poorly constructed buildings; chimneys broken. VIII. Damage is still only slight in structures built to be earthquake-resistant; among substantial ordinary buildings there is much damage and some collapse. Poorly built buildings are substantially damaged. Tall things such as chimneys and monuments collapse. Heavy furniture is overturned. IX. Even in earthquake-resistant structures, there is considerable damage. Greater damage in substantial ordinary structures; more collapse. The frames structures of buildings are thrown out of plumb, and buildings are shifted off their foundations. X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry structures demolished with foundations. Rails bent. XI. Few if any structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed, rails greatly bent. XII. Total damage. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the air. Of the 59 earthquakes “felt in Christchurch” between 1946 and 1994, 47 were MMIV in intensity (ie IV on the Modified Mercalli Scale), 9 were MMV, and there was a MMVII (this was the 8 March 1987 earthquake centred in Pegasus Bay.) (By the way - my understanding of the damage caused by the recent earthquakes in Christchurch that these range between MMVII and MMIX in intensity, according to the Mercalli Scale. Parts of Christchurch were harder hit than others.) The NZIGNS report (dated 1995 remember) states: “Dibble and others consider the 5 June 1869 New Brighton earthquake to have been the most destructive since European settlement. This earthquake is estimated to have produced intensities of MMVII-MMVIII at Christchurch, and reports of the observed effects are consistent with an M5.75 earthquake (Richter Scale) located 10 miles from the city centre…” (NB: the nave of Christchurch Cathedral was not built until 1881.) I found these reports about that earthquake and one that came shortly after: 5 June 1869: Earthquake in early ChristchurchOn 5 June 1869, Christchurch settlers were shaken by an earthquake centred beneath the city, possibly around Addington or Spreydon. The earthquake was probably shallow, with a magnitude of about 5.8. There was damage to stone buildings and the spire of St John’s Church on Latimer Square, and many fallen chimneys. The quake may have caused some ground settlement in the Heathcote Estuary, as locals describe the tide as running higher up the Heathcote River afterward. 31 August 1870: Earthquake near Banks Peninsula On 31 August 1870 the Canterbury region was shaken by an earthquake with an estimated magnitude of 5.8, centred south of Banks Peninsula, near Lake Ellesmere. Damage was minor in Christchurch—a few fallen chimneys and some structural damage to buildings. Shaking at Lyttelton and Akaroa was much stronger, with rocks falling from cliffs around Lyttelton harbour. Anyway, getting back to the NZIGNS report. It goes on to consider the risk of liquefaction, and reports past liquefaction events in these terms: “…Only one instance of liquefaction during an earthquake is recorded from the Christchurch area. This was for a magnitude M6-7.5 earthquake which occurred on 16 November 1901 (intensity MMIX in Christchurch) centred near Cheviot in north Canterbury…. ‘it was reported in The Press that at Kaiapoi the earthquakes of the 16th inst.were felt with great violence; that at some places the earth opened and water and sand were emitted from vents in the ground and that at one time an inundation by water from this source was apprehended…’”

I had a further hunt around for information about this earthquake and found these press photos and this story about what happened in Cheviot reported at the time in The Star: “A terrible earthquake occurred at 7.45 this morning, travelling direct from, east to west. It lasted several minutes. There is not a brick building or chimney left standing. The windows in many houses were shattered to atoms. One little child was killed by a falling house. The bakers' ovens are broken to pieces, and everything in the district is a complete wreck….”

Note the power of this earthquake - "no brick building left standing...." Newspaper reports at the time record a string of aftershocks, the fact that people became exhausted, would not return to their homes, camped in the fields. That the Cathedral spire was damaged. This is the Evening Post newspaper report about what was seen at Kaiapoi during the Cheviot centred 'quake: “…When first shock had passed, Mr. W. Waites, who owns an orchard and garden at the end of Charles and Sewell streets, noticed that his land was' apparently flooding from springs having been opened. It was then discovered that across his land, and part of Mr. Dunn's section, and over the surface of a paddock of several acres held by Mr. J. Sims, fissures from 1in to 3in in. width, and several chains in length, had opened… From these earthquake openings the water was freely issuing in such volume as to cause… probable inundation. Fortunately the rapid expansion of water seemed to be checked by a liberal supply of sand from some grey quicksand layer below the level of the river, and this was deposited in the orchard and elsewhere in the shape of round and oval porridge pots… The water, which had risen about six inches in on hour or two, disappeared by percolation, leaving the sand deposits in different fantastic forms….”

The 1995 NZIGNS report includes this “liquefaction potential map” of Christchurch, with high, medium, low and no liquefaction risk zones marked. The report confirms that the materials that are most susceptible to liquefaction are water saturated, loose, uniformly graded silt and sand, and notes that liquefaction has been observed in loose sandy gravels (overseas examples given). The report states: “some of the Christchurch metropolitan area is underlain by similar materials, particularly large parts of the eastern suburbs and areas adjacent to the Heathcote River… Interbedded gravels are thinnest or absent in the central and eastern area of Christchurch where liquefaction effects and ground deformations (settlement and lateral spreading) are expected to be greatest…”

Here is a section of the “red zone” map released by Government this week which includes Bexley, Avonside and Dallington.

Note the similarity with this image which is a section of the NZIGNS map encompassing the eastern suburbs.

The NZIGNS report tabulates predictions for the likely return periods of different magnitude earthquakes that might affect Christchurch in future. These are under a section headed: “Seismic Risk”, which notes work done by “Elder and others”, and which is tabulated as the graphic to the left shows. Among other things it predicts that quakes as damaging as Christchurch has had recently (at least MMVIII) will happen every 55 years on average.

The report contains a number of warnings. It maps the existence of several known fault lines, but goes on to warn: “an absence of identified fault traces does not necessarily confirm faults are absent from a particular area. Since Christchurch and the Canterbury Plans are covered by geologically very recent deposits, it is possible that some faults have not been detected.” The report explains the significance of how close the epicentre is in terms of damage inflicted. It states: “Close to the source of a large shallow earthquake (Richter 7 or greater), widespread damage and destruction often occurs, with intensities reaching MMIX or MMX. At distances about 100km from the epicentre, intensities are generally up to MMVI…” And it warns: “It should be noted that there are known active faults significantly closer than 100km to Christchurch which could generate similar large magnitude earthquakes.” I don’t know what effect this report had in New Zealand. But it was published in an international journal whose editor (Allen Hatheway from Dept of Geological & Petroleum Engineering at University of Missouri) wrote in his foreword: “…the authors leave nothing to the imagination in the question of local and regional seismicity… clearly, there is now a case for elected officials to take note and to ask and allow local and national agency geologists and engineers, planners and consultants alike, to assist in providing enforceable seismic-withstand guidelines or regulations. More than in most cities, development of Christchurch is served by careful site examination. One has the impression that the temperate climate and tranquil setting of Christchurch belies a variety of benign geologic constraints- those that are costly mainly in terms of financial losses rather than by loss of life. The intersecting curves of increased urbanisation and frequency of occurrence of damage-oriented geologic constraints will soon begin to awaken the media and public officials, as well as the insurance companies. The time is right and the local geoscience and geotechnical expertise is ready.” Looks like it took another 16 years before anyone woke up actually.

It is not as if the New Zealand Earthquake Commission has been ignoring this issue. In fact it appears that the Seismic Risk assessments that are cited in the NZIGNS report tabulated in this blog, were in fact prepared for the NZ EQC. The same table (as above) is set out in the summary of an earthquake risk assessment that was done for the EQC in 1991 entitled: The Earthquake Hazard In Christchurch: a detailed evaluation. (The authors of this work are: Elder, McCahon and Yetton.) (You can see this summary here). The 1991 EQC report summary states, in relation to the seismic risk probabilities: These probabilities indicate that Christchurch has an overall seismic hazard level comparable to Wellington for medium intensity earthquake shaking… The greatest concern for Christchurch, located near a saturated, sand and silt rich, prograding coastline, is the potential for liquefaction…. This may cause subsidence, foundation failure and damage to services. Analysis shows that large areas of the city are underlain by sands or silts which, if sufficiently loose, would be highly susceptible to liquefaction…. The EQC report summary notes that the available data (covering the earlier earthquake events that are described above) is short, making it difficult to provide reliable predictions, given that the best predictor for the future is what has happened in the past. It states: Analysis indicates that potential exists for relatively rare but very large earthquakes (approximately magnitude 8) along the Alpine fault, which essentially marks the western edge of the Southern Alps. More frequent moderate to large earthquakes (around magnitude 6-7.5) can be expected in the Canterbury Plains foothills and North Canterbury area, and less frequent moderate earthquakes under the Canterbury Plains and Christchurch itself. The attenuation model predicts that the damage in the city from these three types of event are likely to be similar. Of the four serious earthquakes in the early city history, three occurred in the foothills and North Canterbury region (the Amuri, Cheviot and Motunau earthquakes) and one virtually beneath the city (the New Brighton earthquake). In other words, what the EQC report summary plainly says, a moderate earthquake “under the Canterbury Plains or Christchurch itself” would cause “similar” damage to a “relatively rare” big earthquake centered along the Southern Alps. This summary also apppears to address the data shortcomings that are confirmed in the later NZIGNS report, noting: We have not attempted an in-depth lifelines study for Christchurch, or included economic or sociological analysis in this report. In addition to the need for this type of work, we recommend further action from the engineering profession including a review of the current seismic loadings code, local seismic design practices and building stock. We suggest site specific studies for the Lyttelton tank farm, Bromley sewerage ponds, pumping stations, substations, hospitals, civil defence facilities, airport and key bridges. Major areas of further research include studies of sand density variations and susceptibility to liquefaction across the city; continued paleoseismic evaluation of adjacent active faults, particularly the Alpine Fault, and further investigation of the deep sediments below the city. The EQC Seismic Risk Assessment for Christchurch is dated 1991. Twenty years ago. How much of this work was ever done? How much of this advice was accepted and acted upon? There are many questions that need to be answered by those in authority. Why? I'll suggest why. This information cites four earthquakes that did severe damage in and very close to the City of Christchurch (1869, 1901, 1922 and 1987). Based on this information the EQC report predicted a return period for another equally devastating earthquake of 55 years. Given the Cheviot earthquake in 1901, and then the Christchurch February 2011earthquake - exactly 110 years later - with a couple of big ones in between, perhaps their predictions are conservative. New Zealand was advised this earthquake sequence was likely. So whose fault is it that authorities didn't act? PS: Since putting up this post, I have added two later ones which you might be interested to read: Banks Peninsula Rising - Geologic History and Historic Christchurch Earthquake Newspaper Archives