THE COSTLEY HOME INQUIRY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11620, 6 April 1901, Page 3

THE COSTLEY HOME INQUIRY.

TO THE EDITOB. ; Sir,— common fairness to ourselves arid for the information of the interested citizens of Auckland, kindly publish :■ the following as arising out of the Hospital and Charitable ; Aid Board's recent inquiry (?) into the affairs of the Costley ,s Home and our subsequent ignominious dismissal. In the first place please give publicity to the following, which ; is a copy of the : body of my letter to -the Board ;of yesterday's: date, as ■> showing our attitude in the matter of an inquiry, viz.:-— " Feeling that J the method pursued 'by the Board iin conducting its recent j' secret inquiry' into the affairs of the home is entirely opposed,to every sound principle of justice and legal and moral jurisprudence; : and, feeling and knowing that we have been dealt with with harsh injustice, l we beg respectfully to t demand-.as an inalienable right -at the Board's expense; a full, fair and, impartial public inquiry;: with open doors, and the j press representatives present, into all the ! affairs of the home." What the citizens of Auckland have a right to know, sir, and what we also have right to know is, if the Board has held its secret and admittedly improper inquiry into the management of the home at'its own expense, why should it not, to be logical and consistent, hold an open and proper inquiry into that management at its own expense ? It has been reported, vide Herald of 26th ult., that .he (Mr. Moss) "Had had ample time to contradict the charges by being brought face ,to face with several parties;" that " that staff Mr. Moss himself had selected;" that " Mr. and Mrs. Moss were simtily perfect until about 12 months ago;" that "he had referred to his salary as a miserable pittance of £160 a year to look after a lot of derelicts;" that "Mr. and Mrs. Moss were condemned on their own admissions," etc. Now, the truth as applied to these matters is, instead of our being condemned by our own admissions, I presented the Board with a categorical denial of the whole of the charges in writing over my own signature; and, as regards Mrs. Moss, she also signed a document purporting to be her evidence, thus giving an emphatic- refutation of the absurd concoctions called charges, preferred against herself. I deny that I have "had ample time to contradict the charges by being brought face to face with several parties.": Neither my wife nor myself have ever been brought .face to face with a single witness. I deny that I have eve.- selected my staff. That right has again and :,gam I been denied me, to the immense disadvant- : age in everv respect of the home and its j inmates. Mr. and Mrs. Moss have never posed as perfeotionists; but, assuming for the moment that we were " simply perfect until about 12 months ago," what, we ask, have we done during the latter period that wo should hot have done, or what have we not done that we should have done, M accounting for our very strange and rapid moral and managerial degeneration? If we have had, as is acceded, 10 years of " simply perfect" service reeorded in our favour, and, assuming some unknown to us retrogressions, why should we not have been fairly judged on'gloho results? I deny that I have ever referred to my salary as a " miserable pittance," either viva;voce or, in writing, and neither have I ever referred to the inmates as being "a lot of derelicts." '_ That word has evidently, for "ur deliberate injury, been disingenuously wrested from its proper connection with the drunkards of the home, and made to apply to the whole of the inmates. The Kinghorne and Campbell cases have been extravagantly exaggerated and overcoioured. "Will it surprise you, sir, to learn that the misconduct of both Kinghorne and Mrs. Campbell for which they were dealt with took place during November last;.that the cases of »ach- were reported in writing by myself in detail to the committee at its next subsequent meeting here, that my action in both cases were tacitly confirmed, inasmuch as neither of these people were called in, and no inquiry made at the time ? To us it is very significant why these cases should be thus resurrected and placed under the microscope of the hostile section of the Board. The affairs of this institution requiro urgent publicity. Will the citizens of Auckland assist I. , us to secure such an inquiry as we seek ?—We are, etc., JonN and Eliza. Moss, ■ "Manager and Matron, Costley Home." ■ April 2, 1901. . ~ , . .