SAMARITAN HOME.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIX, Issue 11540, 29 March 1898, Page 3

SAMARITAN HOME.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Mr Norris in his letter of this date says that I labour under a mistake which is shared by many others, namely, that the City Council is the most interested party; and that the several counties mentioned byhim are more interested because, of course, they contribute more money than Christchurch. Very well. Granted they contribute more money; but this with us is not a question of money, but of human beings, however fallen. The women who are sheltered in the Home are only such as must he sheltered somewhere. The Charitable 'Aid Board have not done so, and in my opinion, and of that of a great many other people who have shown their belief in practice, they are treated more humanly in such a home than they could he under the money-distributing agency known as the Charitable Aid Board. I do not reflect on any of the members of the Board, but on their methods, which are antiquated and unsatisfactory; and this opinion is also shared by a great number of Christchurch people, of whom the City Council on the present question was the mouthpiece when they voted in favour of the Home. But Christchurch is most interested in these women, because they are brought in from all tbe counties mentioned by Mr Norris, some more vicious than others; Christchurch being the general dumpingground of the vice- and folly of Canterbury. Christchurch must protect its young children, its boys and "iris, as far as possible from contact with the grosser vice of these, the worstclass of human dregs; and it is difficult to see what to do with them, except put them into an asylum of some sort—not a gaol —where they may be treated on humanitarian principles. In conclusion, I am quite content to leave the question to the Commissioner who will be appointed to settle the question.—l am, &c., K. B. SORENSEN. PASTEURISED MILK. - TO THE EDITOR. ‘ , Sir, —It is evident from your paper this morning that the, hospital authorities are a bit “mixed up ” on this important question. First they ask for special tenders for pasteurised milk. When I applied, on behalf of tbe Central Dairy Company, for the form of tender, I was asked, if- the medical men desired to see the process of pasteurisation could they do so. I replied,' we should only be too pleased to let them see the whole thing. We expected some of them to come, but no one came. In due ; time we sent in a tender and sample of milk as required. At the meeting of the Board the Chairman reported that the medical staff did nob look with favour upon this article, consequently the Board meeting would not accept any tender of pasteurised milk. To - our astonishment on Friday morning last Drs Nedwill and Fox came to the factory and asked to look through. We said, “Gentlemen, wo have been expecting you before ; but why come now ? No good can come of it; the tenders are settled.” They were shown through the place, saw the process of pasteurisation, asked a number of questions, all of which were answered. Amongst other questions they said they would like to see a sample of the milk from the cold chamber. This was brought; hut I reminded them that they had a sample sent to the hospital along- with the tender. * * * As the result of’this muddle the institution will ho deprived of the use of pasteurised milk for the next year. After a full consideration of the question, I state deliberately that, in my opinion, a number of lives will be sacrificed at the hospital during the year as the result. —I am, &c., J. KNOTT. [We have expunged from our correspondent’s letter a summary of a conversation with the house surgeon, which was evidently not intended for publication.— Ed. L.T.]