THE COMMISSIONER'S INQUIRY

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXIV, Issue 3, 18 January 1906, Page 3

THE COMMISSIONER'S INQUIRY

The postponed inquiry into the charges against the management of the Waltham Orphanage was resumed on Wednesday morrting before Mr. H. W. Bishop S M the Commissioner appointed (says the Christchurch 'Press'). The Charges before the Commissioner were as follow :— ,(1) That the Charitable Aid Orphanage is and has been improperly managed and controlled. (2) That the Charitable Aid Board has in its management and control of the Orphanage departed from the real purpose of such Orphanage, (inasmuch as, instead of it being used entirely as a .home for Orphanage children, it has been made, in very many cases, a receiving home to pass them along to other institutions and places. (3) That there is, and has been, an absence of sound moral training and teaching, apart from controversial doctrines, in the bringing up of the Orphanage children in such Orphanage, and no effort ia made, or has been made, to form and strengthen the character and develop the intelligence of the children placed therein. (4) That the example and influence of those responsible for the children do not tend to implant in the children such foundations of conduct as are essential to make them good and upright and useful members of the community. (5) That the matron of such Orphanage has been unduly harsh in the treatment of certain of the children inmates of such Orphanage. (,6) That she has dressed Orphanage children in grotesque costumes with the intention of holding them up to ridicule and merriment. (7 : ) That she has taunted children with the fact of their relatives belonging to the unfortunate class of the community, and called them mockingly by the names of such relatives, and made flippant references to them. (8) That the persons or person responsible for the internal arrangements and economy of such Orphanage have been incompetent, inasmuch as there has been no propen feeding and ho proper dietary arrangement • or system or fixed hours for meals, and distinction is, and was, made 'at' such meals by having the table divided into two departments, containing different quantities , and kinds of food. (9) That the children were improD perly punished and for trifling offences by long periods of silence. (10) That there was no proper superintendence of the children, particularly in the bathroom and

bedrooms. (11) That the matron has used bad language and objectionable names to the children. (12) that the children Gertie Andrews, Emma Andrews, May Burbury, Eva Bashford, and Ellen Attwood have been illtreated by those in charge at the Orphanage. (13) That neglect and inattention have been manifest in the care of the boy Percy Whittle during his illness and antecedent thereto by those in charge of such lad at the Orphanage. (14) That permission is asked to refer to other matters which form part of the grounds of complaint, and are set out in the report of the proceedings at the Charitable Aid Office. The Evidence. George Scott, ex-member of the Charitable Aid Board, continued his evidence, which was commenced at the previous sitting, on December 22. lie said that Mrs. Carpenter's attention was called to the condition of Percy Whittle by Mrs. Peachy on August 6. The latter said the child was dying, and his mouth and nose were covered with sores. From the (><th August until August 25, | the child was sent to school, although in such>; a delicate state, and on August 25 ho had his ear boxed, and was sent to school afte-r having dry bread for breakfast. On August 28 the doctor ordered the boy to the Hospital, and on August 30 witness and Messrs. Harris and Horrell (members of the Charitable Aid Board) saw the child, who was then merely a skeleton, and was practically dy)mg. Witness enlarged on the fact that Mrs. Carpenter allowed the boy to go on from August 6 without attention when he was in such a delicate condition, and referred to the difficulty experienced in obtaining evidence in support of charges against the management. There was an Institution Committee on the Board, but of course nobody would suggest that they knew what was going on in regard to mis-management. Witness went on to refer to what he, alleged ,was the dietary of the Orphanage. On Sundays breakfast consisted of a piece of bread and butter and the rest of bread and dripping ; there was no porridge. On the other days the children had porridge and fcread and dripping, and it was only within the past twelve months that milk had been allowed for the porridge. That improvement was brought about by the strong efforts of Mrs. Wells, a, member of the < (Charitable Aid Bojard. There were no regulations as to dinner, and for a very considerable time the children were deprived of potatoes The vegetables consisted of swede turnips, cabbage, beet and carrots. ' But at the same* table we find,' said witness, ' the assistant matron sitting there with mashed potatoes and butter for her dinner ; whilst the Charitabfe Aid Board appears to have been too poor to purchase potatoes for the children, the assistant matron could have them. It is well known that there were two Catholic children in the Orphanage, and, of course, they were not allowed, by their religion, to eat ,meat on Fridays. In making my enquiries I find no effort whatever has been made to provide these two children with a satisfactory dinner for a Friday ; they have been compelled to have soup made from meat and with meat in it. The matron and the secretary of the Board knew perfectly well that this was not the food that these children should have on Friday. Only on one Occasion— and lam not sure about that— do I find that there was any fish for them. Conning to the tea, on Wednesday and Sunday the children had a piece of cake, and for the rest of the week they had bread and dripping and no cake, and the larger girls a piece of bread and butter. What I, consider the worst feature in connection with the table is that the matron and the assistant matron and their friends sat. at the same table with the children, and had all the dainties it was possible for the CharlLtable Aid Board to provide.' Continuing, witness said in such an institution a certain amount of fruit was necessary to preserve the health of the children, but they had none provided ; the only fruit they got was what they beggedlfrom the green-grocers or bought themr, selves. It was not until he moved in the matter that a case of fruit was sent down. Witness also alleged thatl the matron had admitted calling the children • little devils ' and other improper names. If the children did anything wrong, they were not allowed to speak to each other for days and weeks ; he could prove that on one occasion a child was not allowed to speak to the others for a month. He could prove that some of the children had been sent to hed at 8.30 in the morning, and it was a very common practice to send them to bed immediately, after tea. On August 27 he said the chairman of the Board paid a surprise visit to the Orphanage at about 6 o'clock p.m., and found two of the children had 'been sent to bed. Witness went on to give instances <of alleged ill-treatment of inmates. One girl was locked up for a fortnight and another was kept in the orchard until 11 o'clock at night. He should prove that two of the children on August 26 got 'such

a lambing down ' that they were heard outside.' Another girl was shut up for a week. On No\ ember 2he received a telephone message that Mrs. Peachy wished to see him on his way to town. He called and she showed him a child lying on the carpet with a bandage round 'its head. She said it was May Burbury, from the Orphanage. Witness said it was a very bad thing that the child should have been kept from the Orphanage. Mrs. Peachy said the child was crying and -would not go back. The child told him that her back was bad before she left for school, but she had to make either six or eight beds betore breakfast. She sand she had not told the matron, because Mrs. Carpenter never believed them when they said they were not well. They called in the doctor, "who lived close by, and a Justice of the Peace was also called in, at the suggestion of witness, so as to see what condition the girl was in. Continuing, Mr. Scott said May Burbury had been thrashed and put to bed till next morning, for not washing one of the boys, and was also called a ' bitch.' Dealing with the two Catholic children, he instanced one Sunday where the mation mimicked the confessional before the other children. He need not comment on:that. On another occasion — and she admitted it — Mis. Carpenter said one of the Catholic girls ' must say grace because she crosses hersclt upside down.' And instead of calling the two children by their names she called them 1 those Catholics,' and they were told oil to hear the prayers of the Protestant children. She had taunted Emma Andrews and reflected on her parentage. Gertie Andrews had otten been sent to bed after tea, and she had told the two one tale, that of v Spring-heeled Jack,' which had frightened them almost to death, and told them not to tell the others. A great deal of blame tor the trouble was due to the Board and its secretary for not carrying out their duties. At a meeting, the whole of the committee! were of opinion that Mrs. Carpenter's services should be dispensed with. Cross-examined by Mr. Harper, witness said he had been a member of the Board tor twelve months. He was present at the enquiry held by the Boaid into the charges against Mrs. Carpenter. He remembered that at the oilicial enquiry Gertie Andrews said that Mrs. Carpenter was kind, and looked after her well. She said she liked the Orphanage and got everything she wanted. Emma Andrews also said that she liked Mrs. Carpenter. Gladys Wilson said that Mrs. Carpenter never sent her to bed hungry ; she always got as much as she could eat. Mr. Scott interposed that he had never complained that the chlildren did not get enough to eat ; it was the quality, not the quantity, that he objected to. Lmder further cross-examination by Mr. Harper witness said Sarah Smith had stated that she looked on Mis. Carpenter as a mother. The result of the enquiry before the Board was a vote of censure on Mrs. Carpenter for using expressions towards the Catholic children. The Board held that theie was no proof of any ill-treatment of other children. Cross-examined by Mr. Lane : Witness said he visited the Orphanage twice while he was a member of the Board. He first heard complaints in June or July, and first mentioned them to the Committee on August 30th, after the chairman had leceived, through Mrs. Wells, a letter from Mrs. Peachy. The opinion expressed by all the members of the committee on August 30th was that Mrs. Carpenter's services should be dispensed with. The Board decided to hold an enquiry on September 30th. Witness held the private enquiry after the Boarfl had decided to hold its enquiry. The next witness called was Win. Wilcox Tanner, M.H.R. He remembered being called to Mrs. Peachy's house in 'November last. There were Mrs. Peachy, Mr. Scott, a Mr. Mellish, and a reporter. iThere was a girl present, and she seemed to be faint and in a state of exhaustion amounting almost to collapse. She was lying on the couch, and was being treated with cloths on her head. Dr. Clayton was sent for, but witness left before he arrived. To Mr. Bishop : He would not like to say that the child looked neglected or uncared for, but she seemed thoroughly ill, and should not have been allowed to reach that state without a doctor being called. She complained of having been ill-treated, and seemed frightened. He should say she was not in a fit condition to have made beds that morning. Mary Agnes Peachy, 32 Ferry Road, said she had known Mrs. Carpenter for eight years. She had no idea that anything was wrong until after the Orphanage was removed, when a boy named Frankie Hammond, who had only one leg, made charges to her alleging cruelty on the part of the matron. Witness went to the Orphanage and saw the matron hit one "hoy on both sides of the head, knocking him down. On August 6th she saw Percy Whittle at the Orphanage, sitting in front of the fire. She drew Mrs. . Car-

penter's attention to the boy, who was very ill, and could hardly hold his head up. Witness advised a doctor being sent for, but Mrs. Carpenter said she did not want one ; she knew as «niuch as the doctor. Witness said some emulsion should be given him then, but Mrs. Carpenter said the Board would not allow it, and she had bought cod-liver oil out of her own money. Mrs. Carpenter's daughter, who was present, called the boy " a sulky Mttle wretch " and a " surly little brute." She supposed he had had the usual bread and dripping. Mrs. Uarpenter said he could eat all right. Witness wrote a letter to Mrs. Wells on August 27th concerning the state of the boy, on the leturn of Mr. Fi'iedlander (chairman of the Board) from Australia. That was before the boy had been taken to the hospital. Three of the children told her that on the Friday before he went to the hospital he was given dry bread for breakfast. When she saw him she did not consider he had proper clothing on. She was present at tea one Sunday. The staff and children were all at one table, and the staff had tlieir bread and butter, jelly, jam-sandwiches, and fruit cake ; the children had their bread and dappling, bread and butter, and one piece of cake. The children sometimes went to her and asked for something to eat. Witness had only once seen a child struck, but Mrs. Carpenter told her that she had thrashed children while they were held down.

Continuing after the luncheon adjournment, Mrs. Peachy said Mrs. Carpenter had told her she had turned Eva Bashford out of the old Orphanage, on account of temper witness thought it was. From what she had heaid trom other children witness believed Ellen Attwood was 'more ot a little slave than anything else.' Witness never saw the child, who was about fifteen, sitting down to meals with the other children, h-hc believed she worked in the kitchen. The Christmas before last Mrs. Carpenter told witness she had given the girl ' a ol a time.' The boy Frankie Hammond had complained to witness about being beaten, and also Gertrude and Emma Andrews, two little children. Witness thought the Andrews got ' pretty lough treatment on account ot their religion.' The ' silence punishment ' was chiefly used in the Orphanage. On one occasion, said witness, Gertrude Andrews told her she ' would rather go into her coffin than e;o back to the Orphanage.' The children told her that tliey made all the beds in the morning, and d/id most of the household work. There was no playroom for the children. Cross-examined by Mr. Harper, witness said all the complaints she had heard about the Orphanage came from the children. It was within the past six months that the complaints had been made to her. In reply to Mr. Lane, witness said she had never seen the children in the Orphanage playing or talking together. In regard to the food, ' such as there was there was plenty of it ; rather too much perhaps.' :It was the quality she objected to. Replying to Mr. Biishop, witness was sure Mrs. Carpenter had said she had given the igirl mentioned ' a 1 of a time.' The evidence of Sister Mary, one of the witnesses called by Mr. Lane, was taken next, to enable her to get away for her holiday. Witness stated that when the Orphanage was in Lyttelton she had attended frequently, to teach the children. They had all the appearance of well-kept children, and never made .any complaints to her. Their clothes were always comfortable, and they appeared well fed when she visited them on Sundays. She had seen them on weekdays coming from school, t *and (they also looked well-cared-for then. In reply to Mr. Cassidy, witness said the children had no opportunity of complaining to her when she visited, as they were under discipline. She was not acquainted with the internal arrangements. Gertie Andrews was then called. She said she was ten years of age, and was five when she went to the Orphanage. At night she had to hear some of the Protestant children say their prayers, but she went to the Catholic church. She had been sent to bed and punished for laughing, and on one occasion she was held down while Mrs. Carpenter beat her with a stick until she screamed. She was punished by being ' put on silence ' once, and not allowed to speak at all for a week. That was for talking out loud when she ought not to have been speaking. Ellen Attwood was ' put on silence ' for a month, and they were not allowed to speak to her. Two other girls were punished in the same way. She used to get burnt porridge for breakfast, and when she did not eat it, then she had to have it for dinner. They got up at 7..30, and made beds and swept up and dusted before breakfast. They had a bath once a week, but there was nobody ■ there to see -whether they washed or not. On one occasion she squealed because another girl kicked her, and Miss McArthur went into the bathroom and hit her on the back with a strap. She had

to go to bed immediately after tea for a week, once because she went to Mrs. Peachy's. Mrs. Carpenter called them ' little devils ' and ' little bitches.' After the Orphanage enquiry one of the girls accused her of taking some money, and Mrs. Carpenter punished her by not allowing \her to speak or play with the others for a week, and to have her meals by herself for a week. She had not taken any money, but it was ' all blamed on to her.' Witness made other allegations concerning the treatment of the inmates. They did not have potatoes for a taonth, but Mrs. Carpenter and Miss McArthur had' them at the same table. In reply to Mr. Harper, witness said she did not like being at the Orphanage, and had never said that Mrs. Carpenter had been kind to her. The first person she had complained to was Mrs. Peachy, who asked .her questions, In reply to Mr. Bishop, the girl said that she and her 'sister used to be sent to church in green dresses and bonnets trimmed with pink, and they did not like that. They had wh/ite dresses too.