SALVATION ARMY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 18 June 1936, Page 4

SALVATION ARMY

(To The Editor) Sir. —I have been asked by several of my friends if I intended answering the two latest letters of “R.S.” and “Iconoclast” regarding the Salvation Army. I simply wish to state that because of the absurd and completely untrue remarks by these men, who have both written similar letters in past years to your columns, and refused to be convinced of the truth, I decline to answer them. The Army would not stoop to such low-down deception, but still stands four-square for all that is right, pure and good. The public can depend that every penny raised by the Army in any shape or form, is spent to the best advantage possible for the uplift and betterment of mankind. I notice that both of the above letters referred to were dated the 12th inst., therefore were written before my last letter appeared in print. I am sorry that there has been sc much correspondence in questioning < the Army’s administration and as I do not wish to prolong this I will not answer any further letters on the subject. I suggest to the above anonymous writers that they secure a bal-ance-sheet of all Army funds. —I am, etc.. H. MARTIN BROWN. Major. Nelson, 17th June. (To The Editor) Sir. —The writers, Mr Lock and “R.S.” on the subject of “Salvation Army.and Relief,” are correct in their statements. I have and can prove the following statements that the “People’s Palaces” are run free of labour expenses by employing girls who are sent into these homes either by the Magistrate’s Court or are working out their maternity expenses, and eventually discharged without pay. Some girls are made to work at the wash-tub before and after their troubles are over, although their expenses are being paid for. Is it not a fact that if a girl has been committed into any of the Salvation Army homes and escapes and is caught, when brought before a magistrate nine cases out of ten prefers to be sent to prison? She, poor soul, at least will obtain besides a night’s lodging and a meal, a few shillings on her discharge from prison, which she certainly would not get on her discharge from the Salvation Army Home. I myself have made appeals to the Salvation Army on behalf of people Who were ill and needed assistance and was refused. Can it be denied that the Government subsidises the Salvation Army Homes for every child inmate admitted into their institutions, and in some cases being paid either by the father or mother of these children who place them there on re-marriage while away on their second honeymoon? Some people say, but look at the good they do! Yes, admittedly they do some good, but just enough to keep the general public from asking personal enquiries as to just what they do do with these charitable bequests left in their trust for the benefit of fallen girls, helpless and distressed. I for one would be very interested to see the yearly balance sheet of the Salvation Army published in the daily papers.—l am, etc., A. MORRIS. Richmond, 16th June.

(To The Editor) Sir, —The charges brought by cor-’ respondents against Major Brown he is very well able to defend himself against, but the charges against the Salvation Army as stated by Mr Lock, “R.S.” and “Iconoclast” are so completely untrue that as a member of the Salvation Army I am not prepared to allow them to pass unchallenged. 1. I don’t know what “R.S. means by “working capital,” but it would be interesting to learn how he computes that working capital to be £32.000,000. 2. That the Army “deals” in tobacco is absolutely false, and having made that statement it is only fair that “R.S.” should prove his words. Doesn’t it stand to reason that if we “dealt” in tobacco our own people would be encouraged to use it, whereas a Salvationist who smokes is extremely rare 3 I would like to know who was the donor of this £21,000, and in what year it was donated. 4. The Army conducts no sanatoriums. 5. Will “R.S.” kindly let us know what instances he knows of inmates of Salvation Army homes preferring gaol life? I know something of the inside of Salvation Army Social Homes, but Mrs Major Brown has devoted many years of her life to that work, and without previously consulting her I would unhesitatingly say “Let anyone who is in doubt as to the type of nurses the Army entrusts it work to visit her and ask her any questions they wish.” In short, Sir, “R.S.” simply doesnt know what he is talking about. As for “Iconoclast,” well, really, he reminds me of the Irishman who, seeing a scrap on the street, hovered around the edge and begged, “Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in’” Still, if you have nothing to hide it doesn’t matter how many join in. “Iconoclast” also wanders very far from the truth. 1 It is not true that - “no adequate balance sheet has ever been published.” 2. It is not true that any of our orphanages are out o'f date. One, that at Masterton, is the most suitably built and equipped orphanages in New Zealand. The donor lives next door to it, spends many happy hours with its well-cared-for children and thoroughly approves of its management. „ . , ... 3. It is not true “substantial charges” are made for admission to our maternity homes. 4. It is not true that any charge is made before admission. Indeed, since he hides behind a nom de plume “Iconoclast” may be one of that large number of men who send their wives, or otherwise, to the Salvation Army Nursing Home at a time when the discussion of terms would be inhuman, but after the best of treatment is rendered both by Army nurses and honorary doctors, these men contrive to be “missing” when it comes to paying a shilling towards even the food bill. 5 It is not true the Army employs “cheap labour.” If “R.S.” or “Iconoclast’'’ is unwilling to accept that statement let them consult Mr O’Malley, of Wellington. If they know anything about business, they will know who Mr O’Malley is, and where to find him. He will be able to state that the Army pays the regular union wage. “Iconoclast” states “The Army, as a whole, is not all it claims to be.” As a Salvationist of some experience I condemn that statement as cruel and untrue. I know of no deceit or double-dealing, or dishonesty, or unfaithfulness embodied in Army working or principles. It would be foolish

to say every, or indeed, any individual Salvationist is perfect, but the Army principle is under the charge, not individuals. I challenge “R.S.” and “Iconoclast” each to publish their full names and let us know their qualifications for such biting criticism of the Salvation Army.—l am, etc., FRANCES A. RANKIN. Nelson, 16th June.