PAEROA HOSPITAL.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 5053, 17 November 1926, Page 2

PAEROA HOSPITAL.

DISCUSSION BY BOROUGH COUNCIL REPLY TO THAMES BOARD. A special meeting of the Paeroa Borough Council was held last night for the purpose of considering the reply of the Thames Hospital Board relative to the deferring of the erection of the Paeroa maternity and casualty hospital. His Worship the Mayor (Mr W. Marshall) presided over the following: Crs. J. AV. Silcock, H. JHare, E. A. Porritt, J. Pinder, E. Edwards, and the town clerk (Mr W. C. Alexander). REPORT OF COMMITTEE.

The report of the special committee was read as follows : —

“Your committee to report having gone fully into this question. Thq opinion of an Auckland solicitor was obtained, and a copy of the order of the Supreme Court, following which a letter was duly forwarded to the Hospital Board.

“Through the good offices of Mr A. M. Samuel, member for the district, a,n interview with the Minister Of Public Health was arranged for on Friday October 29. The deputation consisted of trustees of the Paeroa Hospital Fund, the Nurse Pennell Memorial Fund, and the Mayor. Joint representations were made by these representatives. and the president of the Hauraki Comforts Committee Fund. “The Minister definitely stated tha,t all promises would be strictly kept, and while we are sure that there may still be a little delay, we are confident that in the not too distant future the erection of the buiding should be commenced.”

’Hie Borough Council wrote to the Hospital Board drawing attention to its responsibilities in regard to certain properties and lands held in trust and embodied in. an order of the Supreme Court. The council reminded the board that its possession of the pioperty and funds was associated with the responsibilities of the trust, and as the date of acceptance of same was nearly two years ago, the cohncil thought it reasonable to definitely request the board to discharge its trust and obligations." The council would be glad, therefore, to know definitely when the building would be proceeded with. In reply to the foregoing the Hospital Board passed a resolution, raising five points. These points were dealt with separately by the council, and were as follows, together with the council’s replies :— “Firstly, that the Mayor of Paeroa apparently assumes that the b°ard has refused to carry out the terms of the trust.”

The Mayor’s- letter not only does not assume that the board has refused to carry on the terms pf the trust, but, on the contrary, says “We shall be, glad, therefore, if you will kindly let us know definitely when the building will be proceeded with.” “Secondly, the Mayor be informed of the terms of the resolution passed by the board at its October meeting.”

The council’s reply was: “This council wonld point out that capital levy will shortly be collected in its entirety, irrespective of whether the erection is proceeded with or not; that many farmers are 'asking for the home to. be built; and that no reason is given showing how the proposed amalgamation with Waihi would affect the position.”

“Thirdly, that this board has, a discretion in the matter, and in the exercise of .that, discretion passed the SAid resolution.”

Concerning the third point, thS council’s reply was : “The canno.t have a discretion as to whether it shall or shall not discharge the responsibilities of a trust it has already accepted.” “Fourthly, that while the Mayor of Paeroa hsis, dra,wn attention to clause A of paragraph 2 of the Court order, he has apparently overlooked, clause B, which provides for the board closing the home.” The council’s 'answer was : “Its. purport and citation has no logical connection with the request contained in our letter, and it cannot be advanced as a reason for delay in complying with clause (a) ; and the board’s communication suggests that it has overlooked clause 6, which makes it clear that if the institution were erected and cloFied, the board would still stand possessed pf the responsibilities of the trust.”

“Fifthly, that in the opinion of the board it is wiser to defer the erection of the maternity hospital than to erect it and .then find it necessary to exercise the powers given under clause B.”

In regard to the last point the council's reply was : “We regret to say that this clause giveg us reason to that an effort is being made towards a distinct breach of faith, and we would, remind the board Of the following facts: (1) That in August, 1925, the board unanimously decided to recommend the Minister to accept a certain tender in wood; that the department asked for the acceptance of a tender in brick, and the result appears to be deliberate obstruction oh the part of the board. We would remind the board .that all security in dealing with elected bodies rests entirely on the British principle that legitimate agreements will be honoured. (2) That the board now holds between three and four acres Of valuable land in Paeroa, included in which (by agreement with the bdard) the assets of the. Paeroa Hospital Trustees, accepted with an order of. the Supreme CouVt .that the hospital should be built.- (3) That the board holds the Hauraki Comforts Committee Fund. (4) That the board holds the Nurse Pennell Memorial Fund. (5) That the board holds the, Goverataent subsidies. (6) That the board elso holds 7'5 per cent of the total rates for the capital levy.

“In other words, the board holds in trust for a maternity home in Paeroa ample land and more than sufficient money to esrect the institution, and that this council asks the board, as a responsible public body, to keep faith and use without delay this lapd and money for a purpose for which it was placed in their hands.” These replies of the ‘council to the points raised in the board’s letter

were placed in the form of a resolution, which was moved by Cr. Hare ‘ and seconded by Cr. J. ;W. Silcock, and the whole was carried lyRESOLUTION TO MINISTER. The following resolution, moved by the Mayor and seconded by Or. Siicock, wag also carried: — “That a copy of the original letter to the board, togethei* with the board’s reply and the council's further answer, be forwarded to the Minister' of Public Health, and that jthe coun--cil respectfully point out to the Minister that it considers the board to be definitely obstructing the policy andpromis.es of the previous Minister and ’ the Public Health Department, andthat several members, including the ! chairman and the leader of the ob- - struction tactics, mad© the proposal to dishonour the board’s commitments - a plank in their election platform. ■ Therefore we earnestly beseech the ■ Minister to exercise the powers vest- • ed in him and straightway build the 2 maternity hornet”