Untitled

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 7175, 14 November 1884, Page 4

We have much pleasure in publishino in another column Mr. Ewington's letter complaining of our remarks on the Benevolent Society. This will probably suffice tc convince him, as well as other people, that there is no occasion for being so appalled at the mysterious and Eighty "we"as. he seems to affect. Our apology is dneto Mr. Dando for having, through an oversight, credited him with saying that the result of the house to house canvass of the ladies was not satisfactory,, whereas it appears that he considered it most satisfactory. This, however, does not in the least alter our opinion on the point under debate; for, if £161 Ss Go; represents the whole amount which snch a canvass produced, we do not consider it as at all satisfactory, or as evincing that the society possesses the confidence of the public to the extent we desire. Our remarks were based on the figures stated at the meeting of the committee,, and we were careful to speak in a qualified way, when we said that if the amount then reported represented the revenue for the year, it could not be regarded as. furnishing much reason for congratulation. According to Mr. Ewington, the committee have received in all £460, exclusive of the grant from the Government, though this, it would appear, was not stated at the meeting. This, deducting the sum collected by the ladies, would, show £298 lis Gd to have been received from some other sources which Mr. Ewington does not specify. Possibly this amount may have been contributed by private individuals, which of course we should be pleased to learn was the case. But, as we consider the amount derived from the general public to be thetest of the sympathy with which anysociety is regarded in the community,, we still maintain that the sum received from this source does not show that sympathy with the Benevolent Society to be such as its friends could wish. "We must demur- to Mr. Ewington's insinuation that the former Ladies' Benevolent Society absolutely collapsed through want of public confidence and support. That may be his opinion, and very likelyexpresses his- feeling ; but there aremany charitably-disposed people whobelieve that its operations were brought to a close in consequence of attempts in certain directions, such as he seems now to impute to ns, to persuade people that the society did not. possess public confidence. Be that, however, as it may, Mr. Ewington is labouring under a complete misconception'in supposing that the object of our leader in yesterday's issue was to damage the aociety that now exists. Any impartial reader, uninfluenced by overweening pre--dilections, would see that our aim was to comment on the position the society occupies, the difficulties that beset its operal tions, and the means by which its prospects- ; and its usefulness might be improved. It is, of course, no part of our functions to constrain Mr. Ewington to believethis, though the hope that he may giveus credit thus far for good intentions is. encouraged by the fact that he expresses himself convinced that we would not hard the society intentionally.