The Wanganui Chronicle AND RANGITIKEI ADVERTISER. MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 1901. THE COUNCIL AND THE GAS WORKS MANAGER.

Wanganui Chronicle, 12 August 1901, Page 2

The Wanganui Chronicle AND RANGITIKEI ADVERTISER. MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 1901. THE COUNCIL AND THE GAS WORKS MANAGER.

We confess that we are at a loss to understand the action of the Borough Council in regard to the appointment of Mr Smithies to succeed Mr Curham as Manager of the local Gas Works. Mr Curham has filled the position for a. good many years, and under his management the works proved eminently satisfactory to the shareholders of the Company. It is not too much to say that the Wanganui Gas Company has been one of the best dividend-paying concerns of its kind in the colony. Further than that, while the shareholders have had their dividends the consumers have not been victimised, for the company has during late years consistently reduced the price of gas until to-diiy the rate compares , more than, favourably with the charges prevailing in nearly every other gas-using centre in New Zealand. These two facts may surely be regarded as favourably reflecting on the ability and care of the manager. Again, it may reason ably be argued that these same facts were the chief incentives to the municipal'sation of the Gas Works. The Company was. a flourishing, profit-earning concern. Consequently it offered a. good investment for the Borough. This, obviously, is a correct statement of the position, for it is absurd to suppose that a Mayor possessed of the business acumen of Mr Hatrick would have asked the Council and the ratepayers to shoulder the responsibility of running the Gas Works had they proved a commercial failure. It is true that there have been complaints as to the qunl'ty of gas, bnt in view of the admitted necessity for improving the plant the occasionally inferior quality of the light cannot be urged as a justification for the sum/navy, dismissal of the manager. The fact that the incoming manager is not to be asked to supply the town from the same plant we hold no brief for Mr Curham, but in the face of the above facts we cannot but regard the scurvy treatment he has received at Tthe hands of the Borough Council as incomprehensible. It may be that the Council^ is in a position to justify the appointment of Mr Smithies, but, whether that is so or rot, the members of that body will find it difficult to justify the method of that appointment. Common courtesy, to say nothing of fair play, should have entitled Mr Curham to some consideration. He had at least ithe right to be officij|lly informsd that sikli a change was contejnplated, and to' have been made acquainted with the reason for his removal from the I post he has so long filled. If any fault was attributed to him, he should have been given an opportunity to defend himself. Instead of that, he has been tried and condemned in camera, and allowed to learn from the man in the street that another gentleman had teen appointed to I take his place. Such treatment can only be characterised as disgraceful. The Council will probably say that it was under no obligation to take Mr Curham over aa manager of the Gas Works. Perhaps not, but as against this, common decency should have prompted something approach ing fair treatment. Apart from Mr Curham, an explanation is due to "the .ratepayers. Why has the recognised custom of publicly inviting applications for the I position been departed from? Why has the whole business been transacted in such a secret, hole-and-corner fashion? What right had the Council to assume that Mr Smithies was the only available man for the position? For what reason was it decided that the present manager was not eligible to continue in charge of the works? These are "questions which ths ratepayers have a right to have answered.' It would, too, be interesting to learn how the Council came to hear of 'Mr Smithies, and whether that gentleman applied for the position on his own initiative or at the suggestion of the Council or any member thereof. Aid further, it would be instructive to ]eam whether or not pressure and private motives have been in any degree responsible for the change. If Mr Curham is in a position to throw any light on the subject he owes it to himself and to the ratepayers to do so. We have no doubt that Mr Smithies is an eminently capable man, and one well fitted for the position. Indeed, this is proved by the high estimation in which he is evidently held by the members of the Petone Borough Council. On the ground of fitness (so far- as we are in a position to judge) we offer not the slightest objection to his appointment. What we do object to is the method in which that appointment has been made by the Council, and the extremely inconsiderate treatment Dieted out to Mr Curham.