CORRESPONDENCE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 3718, 1 September 1886, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE HOSPITAL BUILDINGS AND LOCAL BODIES SUBSIDIES. TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMARU HERALD, Sir, — Mr Moody has evidently been considerably ngitated of late over this matter I think unreasonably so. nis last letter also Bbows plainly that ho haß allowed his temper to land him m a fog. Whatever impression my remark} on tho subsidy question may have left as to his using wrong date;, the fact remains that he did so, as neither the ac^s of 1885 nor the discussion upon them as repovtesl m Hansard tare any or little bearing on tho present aspect of the question. It will bo remembered that Mr Moody m his flr«t letter stated that the contributions demanded by the Ilospital Board had to bo extracted from tho ratepayers, thereby meaning, if words means anything, that the amount would have to be provided by direct taxation. I pointed out that this was a wrong view of it, that tho subsidies, to bo given for 1886 were continued solely on account of the hospital nnd charitable aid charges, nnd that the amount tho Levels Road Board would receive would bo fufllciunt to more than pay the demand made upon them. The Local Financo Act of last year was passed partly to compensate for tho repeal of the Roads and Bridges Construction Act and partly to provide funds for local bodies to meet their hospital and charitable aid charges. This your tho Roads and Bridges Construction Act is reinstated under a new name, and the subsidies to bo given under the Local Finance Act are correspondingly reduced. To put this plainly I must quoto a few sentences from tho Financial Statement. '1 ho Treasurer says :— " I havo thus explained to you the substitute for tho Roads and Bridges Construction Act. Tt will involve m the course of time a considerable charge on the consolidated revenue. It is evident, however, that with the prospective charge the Government cannot recommend the subsidies propoicd last year, which, m largo part, were meant to provide a substitute for the repealed Act. But they are reluctant to do away with the subsidies altogether. It was m a measure on the strength of them that the Charitable Aid Act was passed, tho object of which was not so much to »aye the Colonial Government from expenditure ns to relieve it from duties it could ill discharge." Major Atkinson m hia criticism of the Financial Statemont disapproved generally of the continuance of the subsidies, but snid: — "It will be quite reasonable if tho Houso likes to do it to subsidise the Local Bodies to tho full extent to which thoy aro chargeable for charitable aid and hospitals, that 1 should be quite willing to do so." Mr Moody asks where is the suggestion for tho wholesalo swallowing of Road Board subsidies by Hospital Boards ? I reply where is the suggestion that tho money is given for any other purpose? Then Mr Moody drags m a recommendation which I asked tho County Council to pass on May 13th viz , that tho subsidies might be continued as last year. This has nothing todo with tho question at all. Parliament was just then opening, and I had no more means than Mr Moody of knowing that the Roa<ls and Bridges Act would bereßtored, and if I had it would not havo made the desirability for the recommendation any the lesi, as will appear when I point out that the continuance of the full amount of the subsidies would huve given Mr Moody's road board £iO '0 instead of £1000 ns now, while the act substituted for tho Roads and Bridges Construction Act will not benefit the general body of our county ratepayers at all. As to tbo hospital buildings I am not awaro of a No. 1 " pliih to cost £50"0 being ever considered by the board at nil. I cannot refer to records, and must there ore quoto from memory, but that the matter was hurried, as Mr Moody implies, I must distinctly deny. Tho first discussion took placu on the plans and estimates for alterations to existing buildings when the question aroso as to tho wisdom of spending such a largo amount as the estimates came to on temporary measures, and tho nrchitcet wns instructed to prepare plan 3 for reconstruction at a cost, if possiblo, not ! exceeding £3000. In the meantime tho public \ wore kopt fully aware of what was going on, and I believo every member of the board visited the hoapitul to sec for himself, and all building was the proper courso to adopt. The late division on the board over the matter is duo to other causes nltoget her. Theclnim m»de oh the hospital district is about £800 more for rebuilding than it would havo been for alterations only. Now, Mr Moody's grievance is that a body of men, charged with the responsibility of acting for the beat m tho public interest, nnd having carefully and unanimously decided on a course of action, did not m the eleventh hour, reverse that action because he wished it. I do not dispute that a considerable number of ratepayers share his opinions, but I feel assured that the charge of extravagance and shortsightedness woul.l be raised with much more reason for it m a few moro years hence if the board had now given way and spont a la'go sum m temporary alterations, loavinsr a uhargo m the near] future for further expenditure, whon perhaps no assistance may be obtainable from colonial funds. I think I have some reason to compUin of tho tone of Mr Moody's correspondenco towards mo personally. His letters nro markod by many contemptuous expressions and scornful epithots, which, while thoy may ssrvo to show the greatness of his own mind, aro surely unnecessary to a discussion of tho actions of a public body. Mr Moody's opinion may bo quite correct, but I must ask his pardon for thinking differently, and for choosing to act accordingly, notwithstanding his bidding. I am, ka., f Tonw Taiboi. Temukn, August 30th, 1886. [Wo must decline to insert any further correspondenco on this question. — Ed. T.H.]