THE HOSPITAL AND CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS ACT AND THE COUNTRY DISTRICTS.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2138, 23 March 1886, Page 2

THE HOSPITAL AND CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS ACT AND THE COUNTRY DISTRICTS.

A merino, composed of representatives in the AuckUnd Board and chairmen of counties, convened by the Mayor of Hamilton, was held at the Borough Council Chambers, Hamilton, yesterday afternoon. There were present : Hi* Worship the Mayor (in the chair), Mew E. Lake, M.H.R., J. J. Barugh, Pe«ler (members of the District Board), and A. Primrose (chairman of Waikato County). Mr J. B. Whyte, M.H.R., was also present by invitation. Mr Germann, chairman of the Waipa County, wrote stating that circumstances would prevent his attending. The proceedings were chiefly of a conversational character. The Mayor explained that the meeting had been called hurriedly in order to give the Raglan representative, Mr Pegler, an opportunity of being present. The object was to consider the decision arrived at by the United Board at Auckland on Friday night last. That Boaid had at a former meeting decided not to take any action unless the Government would agree to give them an indemnity. This the Government had declined to do, and vet the Board bad now levied contributions for charitable aid. He thought it well that the country districts should now decide upon what course to adopt. The Act was now practically before the people. He would ask Mr Late to explain his action at the last meeting, more particularly in reference to the resolution he had moved, »ni which b« (the Mayor) had seconded.— Mr Lake was bound to coafess that be did not understand the precise object of the present meeting. As far as his action was concerned, he might say that he went to the first meeting of the Auckland Board with the intention of, as far as possible, resisting the operation of the Act. His conduct nad be*n misrepresented, but his main object was to put off astion until the local bodies had obtained their subsidies. At the meeting on the 9th January, Mr Muckechnie moved a resolution which went to the root of the mntter. Messr* Hesketh and Richmond, to whom the Act had been referred, gave it as their opinion that the most advisable course to follow was to proceed under the clauses relating to the District Board. The United Board, therefore d. < nothing, and Mr Mackechnie's resolutio.., which wat resisted strenuously by the Wai kato representatives, was carried. This provided for the maintenance of the " in* stitutions" of the district, which meant everything except the actual distribution of outdoor relief. It included refuges, Old Men's Home, orphanages, dispensary and others. Therefore, in carrying that resolution, they almost carried the whole question. Since then, on Friday last, the United Board had met and resolved to levy contributions for charitable aid. This levy would practically cover sixteen months. The representatives of the country districts opposed it, and whether the levy was legal or not he could not say. Whether or not, the action taken wan in direct opposition to the opinion given by Messrs Hesketh and Richmond, who advised that if any money were required for the use of the relieving officer it Bhould be raised by the District Board. None of the other districts seemed to have resisted payment, and it was for the Waikato to say what course it was prepared to take. He did not think a demand could be made legally for charitable aid. A case had been reported in the papers, but he had not been able to get the decision. As regarded the notice he had given to move for the separation of Waikato, Waipa, Raglan and Hamilton, from the Auckland district, he did not think much would come of it. It arose in this way. The chairman (Mr Waddel) who was somewhat piqued, remarked that the Auckland people did not wish to keep the Waikato districts if they desired to separate, and then he (Mr Lake) at once gave notice of his a motion. If they could get this motion carried it would greatly strengthen their hands in their efforts to get the Act amended during next session. — Mr Barugh thought the principal business of the meeting was t« follow up Mr Lake's proposed motion. He was not lawyer enough to say whether the district could be separated. He confessed that when he attempted to read the Act he only got confused. If it were possible they should do it. The Auckland representatives were apparently favourable to this proposal— Mr Lake questioned this. The Mayor of Auckland had certainly paid as much. He would not like to appeal from Mr Waddel excited to Mr Waddel calm.— The chairman said the remark 'made was that it would be difficult to know what the mind of the meeting might be a week hence. The question, it seemed to him, wa% were they prepared to resist the payment of contributions, whether they had not done what was necessary in the way of protesting. The Government had declared that they were powerless to carry on the institutions, and it now remained to be seen whether the country districts were prepared to fight the question out at law.— Mr Barugh had already stated at the Board meeting that so far as he wan aware the Waikato County Council were not prepared to go to law.— ln answer to Mr Lake, the Chairman and Mr Primrose said *he Government had witheld the subsidies pay. able to the borough and the county of Waikato.— Th« Chairman said the whole of the trouble had arisen through mixing up the questions of hospital and charitable aid. He did not think the charitable aid contributions should be levied on a population basis. It was his impression, after reading Messrs Hesketh and Richmond's opinion, that nothing further would have been done by the United Board.— Mr Pegler said the Act would operate most unfairly in Raglan, where the Counties Act was not in force, and a portion of the county— that covered by the four road districts, would have to pay for the whole. There were no poor in the district, but he had no doubt the Act would make paupers. He thought they should bring all the influence they could to bear upon the Government with a view to getting the Act amended. He was strongly in favour of establishing a central hospital in Waikato. which would suit the counties of Raglan and Piako. He did not wish to raise the question of site, but his own opinion was that it should be at Hamilton.— Mr Lake was afraid there was little chance of carrying his motion ; the country districts north of Mercer ail seemed to join with the citr, and the Waikato was left alone.— The Chairman said sfch had always been the case in the old provincial days. Nevertheless, he thought it could be shown that a hospital in Waikato would be a great advantage to Auckland. It was well known that a change of air was often the best of medicine, and the hospitals at Auckland and Waikato might exchange patients, the auestion of finance to be settled between 10 boards. It was well known that people could live cheaper in the country, and it followed that the cost per head per patient would not be so great in Waikato as in Auckland. There was an idea in Auokland that the Waikato people wanted to foist their paupers on them, while in Waikato there was an impression that Auckland wanted them to support the poor belonging to the city. As Waikato and Raglan did not care to go to law, the question now before them was : Had they made a sufficiently solemn protest?— Mr Primrose thought nothing bad transpired to change the circumstances of the case. He did not speak for the whole council, but he thought the other members were equally opposed to the Act The resolution passed by the representatives of the Counties of Waikato and Waipa and the Borough of Hamilton was one to oppose the Act to the uttermost. — Mr Lake said the contracting parties were bound, at least in honour, to fight the Act, The position had not changed, except that whereas they were then only called upon to fight the District Board they now had to face the United Board and charitable aid.— Mr Primrose said he could not help saying that he was greatly surprised at the action of the Mayor of Hamilton.— The Chairman said he understood that the contribution for hospitals could be recovered legally, and he, as a Justice of the P«uce, wit* not prepared to resist the law. The council's solicitor had ad' vised them that the money was recoverable, and Mr Mapkechnie was of the same opim'on. He always believed that the opposition of the local hodjes was directed against oharitabje aid.— Mr J. B, Whyso said it appeared to htm that they were fighting against a contingency whioh was not likely to arise. The Board was not going to law ; they would be quite satisfied (o take the subsidies, and the beat policy fop the oquntry bodies to follow VoqW \p on. of. masteriy iwWty Wte« «w wtm*w total

to meet the demands of thn Hoard it would be quite timo enough to raise the question of going t<> liw.- Mr 13 irtifrh entirely concurred with Mr Whyte's views. —The Chairman asked what they would do if they were pre«i<nted with .1 writ? -Mr Whyte : Wait till it como-« !— Mr Pnmroso said lie was quite certain that the Waikato County Council would m>t sign a cheque. They would let the (Sovprnment take the subsidies. — Mr Whyto said nothing could possibly bo Rained by paying, and nothing would be lost by allowing the Go\ eminent to impound and disburse the subsidies. The subsidies would not last for ever and when they had not sufficient to pay they would be in the position of defendants.— Mr Lake thought the local bodies nhould stick to the agreement. The legal advisers of the Board were opposed to the Act.— Tho Chairman admitted this, but repeated that the Borough Council's advisors were of opinion that they u.int pay the contribution to hospitals. —Mr Lake baid this was the first ho had he.ud of it. — Mr Primrose saw no reason why the money # sho.ikl be paid. — The Chairman said the money had not yet boen paid. His impression was at the time, and it wai so still, that the opposition was not to the hospital, but to charitable aid.— Mr Primrose contended that at the meeting held at the Waikato County Council chamber* 111 December last the Act as a whole was denounced, and it war agreed to resist it to the uttermost. —Mr Lake regretted that the agreement to act in concert had been departed from by the Borough of Hamilton. — Mr Primrose said the idea wm to offer passive resistance to the Act. He never understood that the local bodies were separately to obtain legal opinion*. The Borough Council departed from the spirit of the agreement when they voted the £22.— After some desultory conversation, Mr Whyte Mid it was of tho utmost importune© that the four local bodies should hang together. The Borough Council had evidently been misled by the terms of the resolution 'passdd by the District Board on the 9th January, and by an implied promise that no more money would be asked from the local bodies than was required to support the hospital. It wan no dishonour for a public body to retrace a step which had been taken under a misconception. — The Chairman quite ndinitted the force of Mr Whyte's argument. He could assure them that the Borough Council had no desire to do anything but to act in concert with the other local bodies— After some further discussion the following resolution, moved h\* Mr Whyte, and seconded by Mr Prim- ■ 3e, was carried unanimously :— •" That in the opinion of this meeting it is desirable that until the next meeting of Parliament no payments should be made to hospitals or charitable aid by the following five local governing bodies, viz. : Hamilton Borough Council, and the Raglan, Waipa, Waikato, and Piako County Councils. That copies of this resolution be sent to the above five local bodies, and they be requested to send representatives to a meeting to be held at an early date to consider the question of joint action with regard to an amendment of the Act, or of forming these districts into a separate district for the purposes of hospitals and charitable aid."