GHOULISH EXPLOITATION

Taihape Daily Times, 29 November 1918, Page 5

GHOULISH EXPLOITATION

Referring to the exploitation that went on during .the influenza epidemic the Dunedin “Star” says:— “It is a sad commentary upon the elaborate structure of modern Christianity to say, after four years of what was expected to prove a cleansing war, that the burden of the Cost of Living during that terrible period was not so heavy as the curse of the Cost of Dying during a panicky four weeks of virulent influenza. It cannot bo denied that there has been a scandalous exploitation of distracted relatives of the dying and the dead in many places during the past month. Those who have had.intimate experience of the epidemic in the North Island, besides which the ravages of the scourge here have really been slight, have seen the practice of a greed that is a foul disgrace to a Christian country. It is scarcely necessary to dwell upon the sordid fact that exploitation in essential medicines, fruit, and disinfectants became so bad that even the National Government, encrusted Against the importunities of the * people against the Cost of Living, had to take immediate action to attempt to lessen the Cost of Dying. There was a time for example, when lemons and oranges could only be purcias :d at from ]s to as high as 2s 6d each; when, owing to the damnable law of supply and demand, other essential necessities soared to scandalous prices. Then, after about 80 per cent, of the population of Wellington had bought at Is 6d a bottle .a “safety sniff ’’ —a little formalin and lavender water —a wise doctor belatedly announced that such a “preventive” merely irritated the membrane of the nasal passage and made the user liable to easy infection. There was. of course, another rush for something else, But the exploitation in these things was comparatively trifling. “The worst exploitation appears to have been practised in unhappy Christchurch, where there has been much grievous delay over interment of influenza victims. The “Sun” has revealed several shocking lack of coordination between the municipal authorities and the undertakers. Our contemporary also reports that undertakers have’ dema idi-d £25 for a p ain coffin, £7 20s for a hearse, and £5 for an extra motor. ‘ln one case an applicant was asked £25 for a plain coffin, and a request for security of payment.’ What is to be done about such gloulish exploitation? The Government should at once prjv’d. severe punishment for all exploiters of the dead,; and should in addition compel them to refund their sordid profits It is strange .that such persons escape the havoc of epidemics. -Perhaps they arc 'spared for a fitting punishment by a Higher Authority. Meanwhile, it is a most discreditable scandal.”