THE FRIENDLY WAY.

Observer, Volume XXXII, Issue 23, 17 February 1912, Page 3

THE FRIENDLY WAY.

How Appointments May be Made to

the Municipal Staff.

THE penetrative faculty of Judge Kettle, coupled with his mar-

. vellous patience, never fails to bring to light the untold story behind a court case which the law of evidence would otherwise succeed in stifling. A keen and sound lawyer himself, the Judge nevertheless plays a strong hand for equity, aucl when he has finished the hearing of a case where something is palpably being hidden, it is fairly safe to say that there is little more to be told. He succeeds not only in cracking the legal nut, but also in dissecting and analysing the kernel.

It was thus that he laid hare in the small debts court the other day a story that, we do not hesitate to say, constitutes a scandal and calls for searching investigation by the City Council in the pubhc interests. It was a case in which David Tosh Forsythe, foreman of works, for the Corporation, was sued by E. Chaplin for £18 for labour done and materials purchased in connection with making the plans for a house in Bridge-street. The defence was a remarkable and extraordinary one. In effect, it was that these services were rendered out of gratitude for favours received. This was scarcely sufficient for Mr Kettle. He wanted to know what these mysterious favours were.

Then there came to light the singular part of the story that specially affects the City Council. Forsythe's own narrative is that Chaplin was introduced to him by a surveyor, and he put him on the paysheet as a surveyor's assistant. Quite a free-and-easy hail-fellow-well-met way of doing things, isn't it ? While Chaplin was in the pay of the ratepayers, Forsythe, who, presumably was his boss, asked him to do a plan for a house for Mr Laing, another Council employee. It did not seem to occur to Mr Forsythe that there was anything in this procedure-open to objection, or even that it was unfair competition with the architects carrying on business in the city, but nevertheless that is precisely how it will present itself to the disinterested minds of most people. Forsythe's defence is that the plans were prepared in a friendly way. Of course, they were. Perhaps also Chaplin was put on the Corporation paysheet in a friendly way. At the same time, it is self-evident that the system of the *' friendly way " ought to be subjected to some limitations.

However, to continue the story. Chaplin, having drawn the plans of the house, asked Forsythe, also in a friendly way, we suppose, to get him a job in the office. Apparently, the easiest thing in the world. Forsythe saw Mr Bush, City Engineer, in a friendly way, no doubt, who put Chaplin on to do some tracings. All very nice, certainly. Forsythe goes on to say, without even a blush, that Chaplin told him (Forsythe) that he had been very good to him (Chaplin) and that he would be very glad' to do any architect's work for him free of charge. But it is pertinent to remark at this stage that if Forsythe was good to Chaplin, it was not at Forsythe's expense, but at the cost of the ratepayers of the city. Why should Forsythe, if the appointment was made in the public interest, have desired or accepted free architectural work by way of payment ?

It seems from Forsythe's narrative that the first plans were abandoned, and that he asked Chaplin to prepare other plans, : . which was also done in the friendly way, and the house was built. " Chaplin lost the billet, which he got in a friendly way, and then demanded payment for the plans. Forsythe refusejd to

pay, because of the friendly way, and hence the action. unfortunately, no decision was given in the case, because it was privately Bettied, but it was apparent from the comments and attitude of the Judge that he would have given judgment against both Forsythe and Laing. The story is instructive and significant in so far as it shows how some people, in a friendly way, can be appointed to the service of a municipality controlled by a democratic vote while other people equally or more competent are not allowed to hear of the opening. This, however, is not the only issue. The appointment, when considered in connection with the grateful services rendered in a friendly way in return, calls for searching enquiry." If this sort of thing prevails in the municipal service, it ought to be stopped.