CARNEGIE AND MOUNT EDEN.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 253, 23 October 1907, Page 8

CARNEGIE AND MOUNT EDEN.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —In reading Mr. Meikle's latest letter, I was much surprised that any one, after having challenged public criticism as he has done, regarding the desirability of obtaining a grant from Mr. Carnegie, should make such a poor end inadequate defence of the position he has taken up. In his letter of the 2nd, when referring to the King, there was no mention that the gift he accepted from Mr. Carnegie was a gift for charity. Nor are we since told what charity it was accepted for. If the King, as patron of some charitable institution, accepted a gift from Mr. Carnegie, then it would be altogether a different matter to that of Mr. Meikle going, as it were, hat in hand, to Mr. Carnegie, asking for money to build a library, which, in spite of Mr. Meikle's yearnings, would be to some extent a luxury, and would have to be called after the name of the donor of the gift. Mr. Meikle makes no attempt to defend the methods adopted by Mr. Carnegie to secure his wealth, and says no point at issue has been raised, and that I am begging the question. In answer, let mc say that on more than j one occasion in your columns I have protested against our people accepting these Carnegie grants, because it -would be taking dishonestly-obtained American \ trust money. Whether or not we have a right to assume that Mr. Carnegie has oppressed labour, it would not be difficult to show that the Steel Trust have dealt very unfairly and unjustly with large numbers of its -workmen. ' Their action resulted a few years since in strike riots, when numbers of the strikers were shot and killed by the orders of the trust managers, and such an unnecessary shedding of blood was looked upon with abhorrence by all right-thinking people. What I did say regarding the disbursal of Carnegie's wealth, was that if he wished to do so in a just and righteous manner, he need not go outside of the United States. When Mr. Meikle, in great glee, enumerates what Mr. Carnegie has done for Pittsburgh, he evidently is somewhat weak in his geography, and requires to be told that Pittsburgh is! only the headquarters of the Steel Trust, ] and that their operations in the State of Pennsylvania alone extends over hundreds of square miles; and that is only one of the many States in the American Union where the Steel Trust monopolises the iron and coal deposits. Amongst these tens of thousands of miners and others, there are hundreds of widows and -their families, who have been, rbereft;-qf husbands and fathers by mining accidents; there are thousands incapacitated from work by being maimed, or through their unhealthy occupations, or from advancing age. And 1 say, that so far as I can gather, Mr. Carnegie, with all his enormous wealth, has made no provison for the welfare of these people who have helped to build up his great fortune, and whether or not consideration for them, coupled with provison for their welfare, would not be more meritorious on his part than giving grants for museums ot art, etc. I wi3 leave your readers to judge. When Mr. Meikle refers to Carnegie's parentage, his birthplace, and the race from which he sprung, one can almost fancy he speaks as one who has a personal knowledge of him, and who prides himself on being a countryman of the multimillionaire. If such is the case, then I challenge Mr. Meikle to show that, outside of disbursing his ill-gotten wealth, Mr. Andrew Carnegie has in any way benefited humanity, or done anything to cause us to feel a thrill of pride that he was British-born.—l am, etc., WALTER CRISP. Fencourt.