CORRESPONDENCE.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLVI, Issue XLVI, 6 May 1914, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

ROYD GARLICK

To the Editor,

. Sir,—For party purposes, Mr Wilford. in Mawera gave his side of this appointment but on. page 162, volume-. No 26, third session, 1913, you will' find the other side of the picture. It 1 is the Parliamentary Committee's Report on this case put on the table of ■* the House by Mr Millar (chairman),. and its finding is as follows: (a) Mr Wilford, referring to the appointment of Royd GarlicE, made t£ofollowing statement m the House • "All this shows that the cry of 'No spoilsws 3?*! ir °™< th, e words used by Mr Wi ford it might be inferred that in making the appointment the Hon Mr motives actuated by political > (c) That there was no evidence which 1 would warrant any suggestion of imM^All™ °n Part °f ihe R<ttu (d) That in making the a p pointment . the Hon. Mr Allen believed he was-. I acting m the public interest. I «< e> Mr Wilford, referring to Mf Garliek s appointment, made the following further statement, namely. "Mr Royd Garliek was the gentleman who nad been appointed by the present Government not on account of his fitness for the position he held, but for some reason he could not ascertain '* From this statement it might be. inferred that Mr Garlick was unfit forthe post of Director .of Physical Training, and that Mr Allen knew that hewas unfit for the position when he< made the appointment. (f) That the evidence does not support the above inferences; but, on. thecontrary such evidence showed1 that the^ Hon Allen, acting on the advice ten~> dered to lr.m believed that -Mr Garlicfc * was qualified to fill the position with credit when he made the appointment. The com-nittee find that Mr Forbes made^no direct charge against' the Hon. Mr Allen, and they further find that no evidence was adduced wlich would afford justification for suggest-' ing that the appointment of Mr Garlick was the result of political influence. On the contrary, the evidence went to prove that the appointment was made by the Minister after enquiry and' in good faith. The committee find that the statement made by Mr Laurenson-that the Minister, had appointed, a personal iriend to a. position worth £600 per annum was without justification and is incorrect; 5. As to salary. As exception has baen taken to the salary which Mr Orarlick is receiving, the committee find that as the work of Director of Physical Training is of a highly responsible charf acter, requiring considerable organising power, thay are of the opinion thafc the salary mentioned is not excessive for a thoroughly' competent man: but without hi any way reflecting upon the . qualifications of Mr Royd Gavlick, they ' consider it would have been advisable to invite applications for the position both within and without the Dominion. While the Liberals condemn Mr Allen i°a i s fPPO'ntment; pages IU9 and 1/0 or the same Hansard show tho men appointed by the Liberal party during their term of office, all without advertising for applicants: Dr. Chesson was appointed on March 14. 1911; Dr Scott on July 9, 1913; Dr. Lewis on 'Z?^& n I '>'1911 \ Dr- Howden on July .25, 1910; Dr. Child on April 17, 1912j Dr. Watson on September 6. 1911 : Dr Lee (A uckland), June, 1912; Mr' Buchanan (Seacliffe), June, 1912 ' These facts sho^ that the"L;beral» were more guilty of making appointments without advertising than the Re- ' 1 form party were. The committee^s- ■ finding should, I think, be a sufficient answer to Mr Wilford on Royd Gar— hck s appointment, and should show Hawera electors how sincere Mr Willord, of the flying brigade, is