THE LYTTELTON ORPHANAGE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1415, 13 May 1886, Page 2

THE LYTTELTON ORPHANAGE.

At a meeting ol the Charitable Aid Board yesterday a report was presented from the Orphanage Committee, enclosing another from the newly appointed master, who says:— “ I was surprised to find on taking up my dutus at the Orphanage, that the childrerf had been gross.y neglected in mmy respects, particularly the girls, who as regards clothing ft ere in a state bordering closely on destitution, while the hairdressing apparatus for ninety-six children, consisted of half en

old dressing comb, ■'s to food, I found the dinners were fairly gdod, but the milk given for breakf-sst and tea had oeeu so diluted with water that it would not make a good drink for a thirsty child, much leas an article of diet. I found the doors of the dormitories clean, but the blankets belonging to each bed without exception were dirty, many of them filthy, but all folded with the greatest care and neatness.” In consequence of above report from the master, as well as personal inspection, the Committee has taken the necessary steps to have the institution and Its inmates placed in thoroughly efficient state.

Samples of the blankets and clothes were produced at the meeting, and three members of the Board who had visited the Orphanage confirmed the report .

It was only natural to expect that, after recent events in connection with the Lytteiton Orphanage,] such a report as the above would draw a prompt reply from the ex-master, Mr Ritchey. That reply appears in the Christchurch “ Press ” of to-day, and it deals in detail with all the charges. Mr Ritchey says that his absence from the Orphanage prevents him from at once and completely annihilating the charges by overwhelming rebutting evidence, but he makes out for hims If a defence, and gives explanations that appear on the face of them perfectly satisfactory. He points out that among a hundred destitute children, it is natural to find not a few wet-bedders, not only among the very young but also among the older ones. He states, and, as he says, “ emphatically,” that a large number of woollen rags were made do duty for blankets in these cases, and that it would have been folly to place good or new blankets under children affected with this weakness. Those scraps of woollen cloth have been accumulating since Mr Ritchey

left, simply because his successor was ignorant uf Mr Ritchey’s procedure in such cases, and these rags have evidently been shown to the Committee us samples of the blankets iu use. Wh n Mrs Ritchey gave out now blankets she did not withdiaw the old ones until they were wanted for somo other purpose, and by thus retaining them a softer bed was secured for the child who slept upon it. Mr Ritchey says he always allowed the boys, and his wife the girls, to bo judges of how much bed clothing they required, and served out as much as they asked for. As to the blankets being dirty, the half-yearly washing was strictly attended to, and the last half was done not two months before ho left the institution. In the matter of

the girls not having sufficient or proper clothing, Mr Ritchey says the charge, as made against his management, is both false and frh o ous. The girls bad been short of proper clothing for months, and as far back as October last Mr Ritchey had requisitioned for a supply, but the Committee declined to sign a warrant for anything at all It was only after Mr Ritchey repeatedly spoke to the Chairman about the state of affairs, and pointed out the possibility of a public scandal if the girls’ clothing was not seen to that the Chairman obtained the Committee’s consent but by tin's time February had been reached, and some time after some wincey for girls’ dresses was procured. So soon ns Mr Ritchey was got rid of, the contractor was ordered to provide dresses at once ; hut when the Committee make their visitation they do so on a Saturday, when the girls are wearing their “ scrubiug dresses,” and this costume is assumed to be all they had. As to whether the children were properly clad, Mr Ritchey points to an answer in the fact that for three years and a half all the children have been Sunday after Sunday attending divine service in a public church and before the eyes of the public, and always neat and comfortable. As to the “ property list,” Mr Ritchey says that the property was inventoried by the persons in charge of the departments, and two articles of furniture included in the list are the property of Mrs Ritchey, and got into the list by some one’s mistake. In the rest of his letter Mr Ritchey points out that be gave his successor all the aid he could be-, fore he himself left the institution. (