The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, SEPT. 23, 1906.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1871, 28 September 1906, Page 2

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, SEPT. 23, 1906.

Wiin-E we admire the patriotism oj our correspondent. Mr A. Fordo Mattliows, we cannot agree with his method of reasoning or the conclusions based upon that method. Statistics are too unreliable as a basis of argument, and no statistical information in this connection can be reliable unless it takes into account every case of

sickness and disease whether they come under treatment or not, and we know that statistics take into account only those cases .that have been treated in the hospitals or reported to the Health Officers. As an index to the sanitary condition of a district they are therefore cpite useless for purposes of

comparison. Tho assertion wo havo mado, und which our correspondent describes as a “ sweeping ” ono is, wo vonture to think, loss “swooping” than his own that “from personal observation during a residonco of twouty-six years” ho has “notodthat, with tho exception of a fow wot summors, tho town of Gisborno, taken on a population basis, has boon as froo, if

not moro so, from dirt diseases than oitlior Wellington or Napior.” What does our correspondent moan by “ dirt discasos ” ? Doos ho not know that a very largo proportion of what may bo tormod 11 dirt disoasos,” if any at all,

have nover come under his observation unloss ho has tho run of tho chemists’ shops, and tho promises of the quacks, and this we vory much doubt. How then can ho olfer an opinion on such a subjoct without tho necessity for “swooping” away a very large amount of roasonablo incredulity? We are asked for tho proof of our assertion that “tho conditions of living in and around Gisborno are not conducive to

tho most robust health, and that dangors to health lurk in every square aero of tho whole area occupied by its residents,” and we gladly comply. In tho first place, can it be assumed that a population of 5500 can exist within tho limits of any borough under “ conditions conducive to tho most robust health ” without tho best sanitary service ? Surely Mr Matthews will not attempt to give an affirmative answer, Have wo anything like the best sanitary service operating in this borough ? Surely a negative answer to that question is equally imperative, so our contention in that respect is proved up to the hilt. Then as to the

dangers that lurk in every square acre that is occupied we may tell him that it is scientifically established beyond all peradventuro that every process of decay or putrefaction of animal matter (and sometimes of vegetable matter also) is a danger to health and produces myriads of germs that are distributed into the street channels, into cesspools, or into the ground through the medium of soap suds, stable drainings, or a dozen other things, there to wait a favorable opportunity to hud their way into the nostrils or stomachs of people, and so cause sickness or death according to their nature and virulence. It may be that this opportunity is afforded by a drying wind or by the process of evaporation from the ground ; but in either case the danger exists because of these impurities in the air brought down by antiquated methods of sanitation such as we have. If our correspondent wants further proof and will not be convinced with anything short of ocular demonstration we are prepared with that also, and will lend him an old microscope to examine for himself the filth taken at random from where bacteria abound. We will even instruct him how to catch them in the air as it flows through our streets at selected favorable points, and if he is not then convinced the task of convincing him must be abandoned for obvious reasons not due to the absence of bacteria. We have no need to stand at the street corners to view the “passing show ” or to feast our eyes on the galaxy of beauty, that would be certain to meet the view, for Gisborne is not deficient in that respect; nor need an inspection be made of the public schools where nothing but evidences of health appear to the casual observer, for we know that among those apparently robust individuals there have been numerous cases of nasal and chest troubles that can only be due to inhalations of impurity in the air. We have not altered the heading of our correspondent’s letter although it is singularly inappropriate because “it doth profess too much.” Indeed every allegation that we have made only tends to show that this community is a peculiarly healthy one, otherwise it could never resist the ravages of disease germs to the extent that it does, and it says much for the healthfulness of the climate too that the results are not more disastrous to ,the well-being of the inhabitants, who appear to be comparatively immune from attack after they have become acclimatised. No doubt, as our correspondent alleges, our “city fathers”

have done their best to cope with the difficulties that we have pointed out. It was not their fault that two attempts to obtain a water supply were defeated, or that the public mind was not prepared for the expenditure or a large sum on drainage. Now that io exactly the point upon which we desire to assist them rather than to find fault by showing the urgency of the necessity that exists, and it is no use lulling ourselves into a feeling of false security in the matter by the comforting thought that there is no danger. If your friend is going along the road and you know that a poisonous snake lies in his path, is it friendship or wisdom to keep the information to yourself and persuade him that there is no danger ? Is it not the more manly and honest thing to say the snake is there and to provide him with a weapon to kill the reptile ? That is precisely the course we have adopted, for the danger is there, there is no denying it, and an up-to-date drainage system is the weapon—the only one—by which it may be killed. To Hatter and say nice things about ourselves is very comforting and agreeable ; but it smacks of hypocrisy that can find no

favor in the columns of the '1 j.mes. Facts are facte and the truth cannot be suppressed even though it be covered with mountains of flattery and delusion.