INSTITUTE FOR BLIND

Evening Star, Issue 19697, 26 October 1927, Page 4

INSTITUTE FOR BLIND

THE MANAGEMENT IDEAL HO INQUIRY NECESSARY [Pus United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, October 25. ]u tho House of Representatives Mr R. P. Hudson (Motueka), on behalf of the Public Petitions Committee, brought down a report on the petition ot Morton Aldis, of Auckland, and sixteen others praying that an .inquiry be held into the management of the Jubilee Institute for. tho Blind. The committee reported that it had no recommendation to makg. . In a discussion which followed Mr P. K. Sidcy (Dunedin South) suggested that tho committee might have gone a, little further, and said that not only was it satisfied that tho petitioners had not established their case, but that the committee was satisfied with the administration of tho institute. Mr H. Holland (Christchurch North) made an approving reference to the improvements made in the institute since Mr Clutha Mackenzie had taken charge. With all respect to the work of tho noble men and women who had supported the institute in the past, he affirmed that the splendid position of the institute was due to tho work of Mr Mackenzie. Credit was also due to tho Government. Ho quoted at length from the.judgment of the judge before whom the petitioner, M. Aldis, had brought an, action in court, to show that ho had written a report to the trustees of the institute couched in “such intemperate language as would justify his instant dismissal,” and, further, that “ his influence was a disturbing one to the harmonious working of the institution.” Mr A. Harris (Waitcmala) said there was no doubt that in the interests of tho Jubilee Institute for tho Blind itself an inquiry should be held, and lie was sorry the committee did not make a lecommetidaiiou to that effect. Dir J. S. Dickson (Parnell) said he thought Mr Aldis had taken up a most unfair attitude towards Mr Mackenzie, under whom tho institute had mode most satisfactory progress. Tho position occupied by Mr Aldis at the election for it position on the hoard of trustees showed what the people of Auckland thought of him. Mr T. AY. Rhodes (Thames) congratulated Mr Mackenzie upon the great service he hail been able to render, not only to the Institute for the Blind, but to the blind of New Zealand generally. Dir W. J. Jordan (Manuknu) thought there was some ground for inquiry, twit that blame should be attached to anyone, but in order to show that the care of tho blind should he the duty of the State. Dir J. A. Lee (Auckland East.) said that whether Dir Aldis was right or wrong, there was no doubt be had the confidence, of a. large number of inmates. Ho agreed, that the care of tho blind should be the duty of the. State. Mr Hudson, in reply, said they were not concerned with Dir Aldis’s treatment by the trustees, but they were concerned with his grave insinuation that an inquiry was necessary into tho administration of the Jubilee Institute for tho Blind. They, however, came, to tho conclusion that the management of the institute was what he might call ideal, and therefore they had brought in the recommendation contained in their report. Tho motion that the report do lie on tho table was carried.