The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, October 24th., 1912. NOTES AND COMMENTS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1014, 24 October 1912, Page 2

The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, October 24th., 1912. NOTES AND COMMENTS.

For the convenience of private box holders, the box lobby at the post office is left ipen all night—a lact which is much appreciated by those interested. There are others who do not pay an annual rental of £1 who appreciate the open door policy of the postmaster for the purpose of sheltering for the night and partaking of liquid refreshments. East night the mat, which is placed at the public entrance, was taken into the lobby , and used as a pillow by some boozy person or persons. Certainly, such a head rest with its myriads of germs would not induce balmy sleep in the ordinary mortal, but the empty beer bottles bore evidence that the amber coloured liquid was proof against such trifles to last night’s dossers. At an early hour this morning the postmaster could be seen sprinkling a strong disinfectant on the lobby floor and heard muttering imprecations on the heads of those who had unlawfully spent the night there. This is not the first time that the private box lobby has been used and messed up by an undesirable class, and it is about time an example was made of them if the lobby is to be kept open. The other alternative, which will not be appreciated by boxholders, is to have the lobby locked up between the hours ol 10 p.m. and 8 a.m

The Wellington. Hospital Board has passed a resolution urging the medical conference to obtain the family history of all persons suffering irom consumption, and admitted to every sanatorium. Mr Gardener moved the resolution and said as things were at present the information obtained was so meagre that, in most cases, it was difficult to determine whether the disease was hereditary or not. He was in favour of a system under which, even after patients had left the institutions, the authorities could periodically learn their whereabouts and couditions of health.

The House censured Sir Joseph Ward for having referred to a remark addressed to himself by Mr Hiue, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, as “a downright piece of impertinence.” The “Post,” commenting on the incident, says:

—“The Government had the option of sacrificing the dignity and authority of Parliament on n " 1 ' • p sAI e*- 5 0ui. l.;c Prime Minister . . uitiiiy took the opposite c.-u se in the most lenient manner possible. We cannot see how any Oppositionist, in a calm moment, can imagine how Mr Massey could have acted otherwise after the Speaker had ruled that Sir Joseph Ward had committed a breach of privilege, and had declined the Speaker’s request to withdraw the words. Sir Joseph’s long experience as a public man in high positions should have induced him to obey the Speaker’s ruling. At the same time it has to be said for him that he admitted he would have withdrawn the words if Mr Hine, at any time during the discussion, had indicated that he had not meant to be offensive by his words and manner last Friday. Mr Hine characteristically preserved a stolid front- He evidently wished Sir Joseph Ward to play horse to Stratford’s cart, and thus came the deadlock. That silence, no doubt, seemed unreasonably sullen to Awarua’s member, and hardened him in his obstinacy. Mr Hine is a young member, but this incident should make him a little older. Some day he may be a Daniel come to judgment.’’