UNFAIR TREATMENT

Otago Witness, Issue 3415, 29 August 1919, Page 53

UNFAIR TREATMENT

POSITION OF RETURNED MEN. SEVERAL 'INSTANCES CITED. Several instances of what was considered unfair treatment of returned soldiers by various branches of the Government were given at a meeting of the Wellington ±leturned Soldiers' Association (says tne Post}. One member spoke of a soldier with four years' service wiio applied tor the position of assistant building inspector under the Public Works Department, the vacancy having been announced in the Gazette. In answer to his application, he Was informed that as he was not a Government employee his name could not be considered. "' is mot that man, after four years' righting for the State, to be considered a Government servant'/" asked the member who brought the matter forward. v Another member spoke of a returned • soldier's experience in his endeavour to purohase a house under the Government scheme. Prior to the soldier's return his father had a house in the market at £750, but, receiving advice that his son was returning, withdrew it, as he knew his son would want to purchase a house. The son applied for Government aid in purchasing the house, his father reducing the price to £6OO. In due pourse the soldier was informed that the Government valuation was unfavourable, and that therefore the Land Board could not recommend the Minister to approve an advance. Despite the Go•prnment valuation, however, that house was sold within a week on the open market for £BSO I The next speaker referred to the position of men who wished to rejoin the Railway Department. Many men, said this speaker, obtained leave to go to the front, and, on being, discharged as fit A upon their return, 'applied to the Railway Department to be taken back in their"" old positions. They were surprised to learn, however, that, despite the finding of the Army doctor, they were required to be examined by the department's doctor. Their surprise at that time was as nothing, though, to their blank astonishment when the department's doctor refused to pass them as fit to take up their old positions. The department, the speaker urged, ought to be prepared to take the word of the Army doctor. The Chairman (Mr J. D. Harper) said that the matter had been before the committeo- previously, and at that time they had been' informed that the medical examination for the Railway Department was far more strict than that of the Army. A Voice: More strict than that which decided whether men were fit to stand the strain of hard fighting? The first speaker also said that members who were disabled were not taken back by the department to do light work. Another member said-the explanation of the matter was that men not really fit were passed as fit A and sent to the front. Those men were used on service, and then, to do away with the necessity of paying them pensions, they were discharged as fit A. The vice chairman (Mr A. Curtayne) said that if the matter was to be placed before the department, specific cases must be cited. Personally, he had not heard of any cases of fit A men being turned down as described, although he knew of partly disabled men who had been unable to secure work. A member announced that he was able to supply details of a case, and it was then decided to ask the Minister of Railways to receive a deputation on the matter. The Chairman promised that • the other matters discussed would be followed up by the executive. Later in the meeting the district organiser, Lieutenant-colonel G. Mitchell, spoke of the unfair position in which certain men who had sold their farms to go to the war were placed. He gave two instances where man had endeavoured to buy back their farms, and had been met _ with a demand for greatly enhanced prices—one man had been asked for an extra £7OO on a 100-aore farm, while in another case the price had been raised from £23 10s per

acre to £37. "That is wrong," he said. "It has been said that the value of land in New Zealand bad been increased by 20 per cent." during the war. The soldier has enabled that increase to take place, so why should he be charged for the value he himself has created?"