LIGHT CUT OFF AS PENALTY

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23585, 12 March 1942, Page 6

LIGHT CUT OFF AS PENALTY

♦ MEDICAL OFFICER AND E.P.S. WORKER COMPLAINT MADE ABOUT TREATMENT A strong complaint about the treatment she had received in having the electric lighting at her flat, at 77 Carlton Mill road cut off without warning last night because of an alleged offence during a recent black-out was later made to “The Press” by Dr. J. Druker, school medical officer. District Health Office, Christchurch, and a member of the Emergency Precautions Services. Dr. Druker said that she had returned home from the offices about 5.30 p.m. and encountered a policeman and another man, presumably an electrician, standing on the doorstep. Her sister, Miss M. Druker, the other occupant of the flat, told her that the two men had, without warrant, brushed past her into the building and cut off the light. While she had been away during a recent black-out, Dr. Druker said, a complaint had Apparently been made to her sister about a small chink of light showing past a blind, but not in the officially blacked-out room. Since then neither she nor (to her knowledge) her sister had received verbal or written warning of an intention to cut off the electric light. She had, she said, on being told why the light was cut off, explained that such action was ridiculous in the circumstances, and especially at times like these, as she would not be able to carry on essential work, such as firstaid in an emergency, in a darkened house. She had, she said, promised that she would undertake to see that no offence occured again if they would restore the lighting, and when this proved of no avail, she told them that the least they could do was tell her from whom they had authority, so that she might approach him, but they had not appeared to know anything about it. When questioned, the policeman told her, she said, that the light would remain off for a week, and to her expostulations he had simply said that those were his orders. She could not get any information from him about the person to whom she should appeal. She had telephoned the police, who told her to get in touch with the Municipal Electricity Department. She had telephoned the Municipal Electricity Department, and someone had told her that perhaps Mr Hitchcock (general manager) would know.something about it. She had telephoned Mr Hitchcock’s house, and he was away, the person answering not being able to tell her how to get in touch with him or who his deputy was. Unable to get into the Municipal Electricity Department, she had telephoned the Town Clerk (Mr H. S. Feast), who had not been able to advise her, but when asked if the Chief Warden (Mr E. H. Andrews) could not do something, had said that Mr Andrews could be contacted the next day. She had then telephoned Mr Andrews, who told her that the matter was not in his hands and that she would have to get in touch with a Mr Shanks, who he said had been appointed by the Government and was in control. Dr. Druker added. She had told Mr Andrews that she was in the E.P.S. and that she would not be able to find her equipment should an emergency arise, and he had replied, she said, that he could do nothing that night, and that she had broken the law. She had received no satisfaction from him about why she had received no written warning. On telephoning Mr Andrews later she had been told that Mr Shanks might be on the bowling green, but that he (Mr Andrews) could not get in touch with him. She had taken the opportunity to complain strongly, she said, about the “Gestapo-like methods” used in cutting off the lighting.

POWERS UNDER THE , REGULATIONS" WARDEN’S COMMENT ON CITY CASES Certain of the powers under the reduced lighting and black-out regulations were outlined by Mr F. J. Shanks, Chief Lighting Warden, Christchurch, when the complaint by Dr. Druker on - the disconnexion of her electric light was referred to him. One of the penalties for a serious breach (which would imply that quite a lot ot light was showing during the black-out) was disconnexion, he said. Offenders could be fined or imprisoned or both, or alternatively their lights could be cut off for a period. Heavy penalties could be imposed if necessary. As a result of offences in the last black-out. 18 business firms were being prosecuted, 81 residences would have their lights disconnected (for one week on this occasion), and a considerable number of minor offenders would be notified and asked to be more careful. The decision to prosecute firms had been taken because disconnexion would mean that the penalty would fall unevenly on others such as employees. Under the regulations Mr Shanks added disconnexion had to be done by a policeman accompanied by a registered wireman attached to the staff of the local lighting authority, in this case the Municipal Electricity Department. These men were provided with notices to the occupiers notifying them that disconnexion wou.d now take place because of an offence. The right of access to premises for this purpose, Mr Shanks added, was definitely stated in the regulations. Full warnings of requirements and penalties -had been given, he said, by frequent publishing and broadcasting of details, and the fact that occupiers of premises in Christchurch with relatively few exceptions, had complied indicated that the publicity could not be regarded as anything but a sufficient warning, __