HOSPITAL BOARD'S FARM.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 May 1920, Page 6

HOSPITAL BOARD'S FARM.

DISCUSSION AT MEETING. COMMITTEE AKD MANAGER CRITICISED. DISPOSAL OF LAND SUGGESTED. DECISION ADJOURNED FOR A MONTH. For some tin)© past the Taranaki Hospital Board has not been having a very happy experience in connection with the control of its farm. On several occasions some members of the Board have criticised the farm management and suggested that the cost to the Hoard was more than was warranted by the return from the land. On the other hand other members of the Board have contended that for the sake of a good, regular supply of fresh milk for the Board's institutions the farm was worth while, even if it was run at a small loss. In addition to these matters the Board lias recently had to face ♦rouble on account of friction between the farm manager (Mr. W. C. Noble) and the farm assistant (Mr. E. E. Jury), Which was brought to a head when Mr. Noble returned to duty after sickness and holiday leave, during which time Mr. Jury was in charge, when he alleged that the result of his 2J years' work had been destroyed in n little more than a month, and as a result of which the assistant had resigned.

OPEN BOARD VERSUS COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS.

For the sake of the parties concerned the matter at the April meeting of the Board was dealt with in committee. At yesterday's meeting, however, Mr. E. Gilmour raised a protest against the reports of the farm manager and the chairman of the farm committee being put down on the agenda paper to be dealt with in committee. He said they should be considered in open board, as the ratepayers who had to provide the money which the Board spent had a right to know how it was expended, and if there was mismanagement at the farm they should h/iow what was going on. He moved that the. matters be taken in open board. Mr. F. J. Hill supported Mr. Gilmour, and in doing so asked whether the farm assistant had been given an opportunity, in the course of the inquiries made, of answering the charges made against him. The chairman of the farm committee (Mr. John Andrews) said the farm committee had visited the farm and gathered the fullest information possible. In regard to the matters being considered in open board be was quite agreeable that, should be done except in cases in which lie thought it inadvisable to make certain matters public. The secretary explained that the farm matters had been set down as committee work on account of a letter he received from the chairman of the farm committee suggesting such a course. Mr. Andrews explained that he thought some of' the matters which had to come before the Board should not 1 be made public. Other members present supported the proposal to make the proceedings quite open, and the motion moved by Mr. Gilmour was therefore carried. CANDID CRITICISM. Mr. Gilmour then rose and made some strong criticism of the methods of the farm committee and also of the farm manager. In the first place be said under the present system be had no confidence in the. farm committee, and he felt, after hearing the minutes of a meeting of the farm committee when they decided on the course of action recently taken, that they had not given the farm assistant a fair chance to defend himself. In referring to the annual statement of accounts in connection with the farm, which showed a deficit of £2lO 14s 3d. he said there were items of £4 10s allowed as the estimated value of certain turnips which had been eaten off and £5 for young grass, and he thought it better to give the farm hand the credit for Hurt than to pay £3B for feed in order to save the crops eaten off.

ROTTEN HAYSTACKS. In the items under the heading "Stdck in hand" there appeared crops and hay £142. How much value this was Mr. Gilmour asked tiic Board to judge from a sample' of hay which he produced, which he had taken from a haystack the previous day. When the sample was unwrapped and placed on the Board table it showed rotten throughout. He and Mr. Hill had examined the stack which appeared quite rotten, and lying all round it was thatching material which had never been put on. He said there was not a farmer on the committee who would run his farm the way the Board was running its farm. Mr. Andrews said there had been only one opinion among the members of the farm committee and that was that the two. men concerned could not possibly work together, and he thought it was recognised which one of the two was most valuable to the Board. In regard to the crops that had been eaten off he said that if the grass had been properly utilised it might have become of much more value than that put upon it. He believed the farm manager had done the very best that could be done for the Board. UNDERHAND INFLUENCE AT WORK. Mr. J. Young said that when the farm committee paid its visit and made inquiry into matters they found turnips pulled which were no bigger than carrots. Thev should not have been pulled at that "stage. When the question had been before the Board last month he thought it was fully threshed out and everyone was decided as to what must he done. Personally he was satisfied that if the manager was not capable of looking after the farm the other man was not. It was evident there had been a lot of frictTon and also street-corner talk, if not under- ' Jiand influence, and if there was a want of confidence in the farm committee or in him as a farmer he was quite ready to get out. Mr. Andrews: Hear! hear! Mr. Gilmour protested against the suggestion of underhand influence, and said the ratepayers in the locality were all calling out about what was going on at the farm. Mr. Hill: Hear! hear! Mr. Gilmour said he was very sorry the whole committee were not present at the meeting. Mr. Young said the farm committee had not been given a proper chance. As for the sample of hay brought by jjy. QUaour, b« *aid any tiit man

would not have brought such a sample It was no indication of what the f-iV m represented to the Board. When it y/a< first taken over it was only barren hill* It was now, at any'rate,' 2o to 30 per cent more valuable than then.

TOO VALUABLE FOR FARM LAND.

The chairman (Mr. M. Fraser) fe ferred to tJio acquiring of tiro farm, au-l said when the eomnyttee was set up lie had the utmost confidence in the men who formed Unit committee No one could say they had neglected their duty in going up to the farm. but he did not think it his duty to supervise their work. His own personal opinion was that the land was so valuable and the cost of running so much that it did not now pay the Board to continue working the farm. It, was now practically town property. If j n . terest was added to the capital, amount in the farm, and the loss for the year taken into account, there was a debit of practically £4OO for the year. He thought the time had arrived when the Board should put its farm in the market. He suggested this course without any reflection on the committee or on the men working the farm. It was being run at a loss and must he with the land at its present value. The utility of the farm was for milk production, and even though they had allowed ai= much as Is Sd per gallon for the milk, yet it could not be made to pay. He did not believe there was a hospital in the country which waj paving that much for milk. Christchurch paid only Is 2d. Mr. Fraser went so far as to gay it was in his opinion almost criminal for the Board to continue to carry on the farm under present conditions. He thought the milkmen Should be approached to see what could be done in the faatter of securing a 12 months' supply of milk, and if a reasonable contract could be made the property should be put in the market. He did not think, however, that the Board should take such action at the meeting, in view of the absence of several members. At any rate he • had come to the conclusion that the Board should no longer hold on to the farm. Mr. Andrews said he Jid not think conditions at the farm were any wores than tho*e in connection with other matters in which the Board was concerned. There were increases in the cost of everything, and, unless the farm was credited with the increased value of its product, it certainly could net carry on at a profit.

ADJOURNED FOR FULL MEETING. Mr f;. Young considered the. matter was of snelt importance that it should not be decided without a full meeting of the Board, and he moved that consideration be adjourned for one month ana that the other members be notified; in the meantime inquiries be made regarding prices of a supply of milk for 12 months. Personally, if the farm was valued at £2OO per acre, he was in favor 'of soiling it and, if neeessarv. acquiring land of lesser value a litt!« farther out of town, and still contir.ar to provide the same supplies for the Board's institutions- • -

Tiie motion to adjourn consideration till next meeting was carried, and the Board proceeded to consider the monthly reports dealing with the farm, which will be seen in some respects to have prompted the discussion which preceded their consideration. FARM REPORTS. The chairman of the*farm committee (Mr. John Andrews) reported having visited the farm on May oth, and found things moving along quietly, though the staff was seriously handicapped through not having the use of the cottage which was in occupation of the farm hand. He stated the work was in a very backward condition owing to the manager's illness and absence on leave, as practically nothing had been done in pre-, paring for future requirements. Consequently there was some leewav to make. up. He also felt there would he some difficulty in maintaining the milksupply for the winter, as food that was being saved for winter fodder had been unnecessarily sacrificed during the term the late farm hand was in charge, in order to swell his returns, which "could only be done at the expense of future requirements. However, with a good crop of turnips and mangolds it was hoped to get through without a great deal of trouble-

The farm manager (Mr. W. C. Noble) in his report said that on resuming after his holiday he found things in a deplorable state, and that the fruits of his 2* years' work had been torn to pieces in a little more than a month.

In a further letter he fvnpealed to the Board to see that he got the use of the oottage at the farm as, having to commence work at 4.30 a.m. and continue till 5.30 or fi p.m., it was too much to do while he lived so far from the farm. E. E. Jury applied for one month's holiday on full pay, pointing out that he had been in the Board's employ for three years and had never had a holiday on full pay, while all the other members of the Board's staff, both at the hospital and home, got their holidays and also a half day off evorv week.

It was decided to gTarit Jury the holiday as applied for provided he vacated tlie" 1 cottage within a reasonable time.