The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1890. THE TIMARU HOSPITAL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2060, 17 June 1890, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1890. THE TIMARU HOSPITAL.

The members of the Hospital and Charitable Aid Board continue to keep themselves en evidence. They are mean in the extreme in doling out Charitable Aid ; they give it as grudingly as if it were their hearts blood; they are extravagant beyond conception in other respects. In building palatial residences for the staff of the hospital they squandered money with princely recklessness, but Mr Bumble's paupers never came nearer dying of starvation than the poor who have the great misfortune of being dependent on them. The story of the ventilation question, which appears in arjother column has a great deal behind it, but as certain facts which have been communicated to us, hare not been made public yet, we do not care to undertake the onus of going further than what everyone knows. The published facts are sufficient to convince any one that all is not straight and fair. From these we gather that Messrs Duval and "West were invited to report on the sanitary arrangements of the hospital; also that they did so, and that they were paid for their work. A tradesman was sent to the hospital to do the work pointed out as necessary by Messrs Duval and West, but he came away without doing it. Now, it is not likely that a tradesman would leave without doing the work if he got the chance of doing it. There can be no doubt that something or somebody stood m his way, and who that something or somebody is, has not been made perfectly clear. Mr Ross explains it in this way : Mr Marchant was very much annoyed because he was not asked to report at the same time that Messrs Duval and West were and made some noise about it, and as he was a personal friend of Dr Lawson, the latter prevented the tradesman from doing the work, as the plans had not been prepared by Mr Marchant. Dr Lawson denies this. He says the tradesman came to him for instructions, and that he had none to giye him, but we think he ought to do more than deny it. The charge is so Berious that we would not have published it only that he has allowed it to pass with a mere denial. We give his denial and his explanation, , but we are of opinion that Dr Lawson i ought to have cleared himself of the imputation that he used his position in such a way. The charge has been made against him by the man who was then chairman of the board, and a mere denial of so serious an accusation coming from that source is not enough. At any rate the tradesman was not allowed to carry out the work, the report of Messrs Duval and West was put out of sight, and Mr Marchant was invited to make a report. From beginning to end it has not been suggested that the board deemed Messrs Duval and West's report useless; in fact it is admitted that the board accepted it when they sent a man to do the work in accordance with it. Now, herein lies the extraordinary part of the business. Me«sra Duval and West's report is accepted by the board, no one has anything to say against it, but it ia laid aside, or put out of sight after it has been paid for, and another architect is brought in to report on what had already been settled upon. Was this done to please Mr Marchant because he was angry at not having the job himself ? Was this done to make a job for Mr Marchant ? If not, what was it done for ? We merely ask the question, liks Dora Dartle,' for information, out of sheer curiosity. This is just the point: Why was not Messrs Duval and West's report used instead of incurring the additional expense ? We make no charge against anyone; we only ask for an explanation, and if given it we shall be most happy to publish it. If, however, there is no explanation given we shall be forced, however reluctantly, to conclude that it was a piece of jobbery, more #lthy than the stenohes with which the whoje affair deals. It has been said that it was all a muddle. We refuse to let it off on that plea. We demand a better explanation than that, and it must be given before the public will be satisfied that public money has not b,@en wrongfully applied. If we remember rightly Messrs Duval and West only suggested the expenditure of a small sum —£10 or so if we mistake not—now the tender is £JSO with architect's fees added. Mr Duval guaranteed to put everything right for £SO, and in the event of a failure claim no pay whatsoever. Why did not the board accept; this offer ? Is there a member of the board who would not have accepted it, had it been his own private business ? Not one, and in the facs of that we do not think the members of the board can defend their actions. As usual, we have to commend Mr Barker. We have never yet known him to have been mixed up in anything unexplainable, and we know him intimately on public bodies for the last fourteen years, He is always above board, no influence will ever make him do wrong '

if he knows it, rnd the fact that he worked against this affair goes a long way to convince us that it was not fair.

LAND SALE,

A eesident in the district has called | onr attention to the conditions under which the Four Peaks and Waitohi runs are to be offered on the 24th inst. He has given us his views as follows: "A purchaser for cash is not bound to live on the land and may purchase more than 2000 acres in hia own name. "Deferred payment or perpetual lease holders are compelled to live on the runs, which are altogether unfit for such a purpose, having no level land on them, and the altitude being too high to live comfortably on. "These conditions were never intended to apply to such lands as those to be disposed of on the 24th inst., imd if they have to be strictly carried out will result in the whole of these runs passing into the hands of the capitalists."

Is it only now our friend understands how the present Minister has been playing into the hands of the wealthy ? We thought everyene knew t, as it has beeu made public often enough. We can tell our friend that the conditious were specially intended for su«h lands, and that no effort of ours or anyone else can alter them. Sir Eobert Stoat exposed the whole system recently, and the reply of the Minister was that he had settled on the land so many mere than anvone else had. Our friend will see bow, if he has not seen it before, how the present Government has settled people on the land. Purchasers for cash need not live on the land, but the poor man must. The consequence is that the adjoining owners of the land are generally the purchasers, and that the poor has not the slightest chance. In this district a few weeks ago land was disposed of, but it all fell into the hands of adjoining land-owners, and nice little nibbles some of them got. Now the Government boast of having settled these people on the land, whereas they were all settled on it before, and this is the way they make up their figures. Mr John Ballance pointed out in the House last session where they claimed to have settled on the land people who had been on it for several years before the Government took office. The people had actually been settled on the land by Mr Eolleston, and were under Mr Ballance's supervision for three years afterwards, but they had completed their purchases in Mr Richardson's time, and he claimed that he had settled them on the land. That is the way dust is being thrown into the peoples eyes, and we are glad the whole matter has now been brought home to our friend, as he will doubtless understand the scheming underhand way in which the present Minister of Lands is playing into the hands of the wealthy. But what is the good of explaining all this ? We have often enough explained it, aad what is the good of it. The people will vote for the same class again as they have always done.