The Wanganui Chronicle. " Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1909. DISCOURAGING MERIT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12161, 1 March 1909, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. " Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1909. DISCOURAGING MERIT.

If, as is popularly understood to be the cas<?, tho practise of encouraging employees to use their brains is widely 101 l owet! in the United States and in seme of the more progressive countries of the old world, there is certainly room for believing that it lias not as vet commended itself to the favourabb consideration of that particular.branch of officialdom which runs the public :Tilways..,in this Dominion. The current number of "The Railway Review relates the experiences of a casual fitter who lias increased/ as the result of bis ingenuity, the efficiency of hydrau-

lie cranes* and who as the indirect consequeuco of his ingenuity has been dismissed from tho service. Early in the session of 1908, tho Hon. Hall-Jones—;, then Minister for Railways—combating a suggestion that railway employees of an invent ivo turn of mind were not boing sufficiently encouraged, mentioned that notices were being placed in each railway workshop inviting from the employees any suggestion by which operations could be quickened or more economically conducted. A fitter, named Stanley V. Croft, while making some alterations to one of the Department's hydraulic cranes on tho Greymcuth wharf, discovered a method of greatly accelerating its "slewing" or turning movement. The improved crane did so well that a shift called for 1 a.m. to complete* loading a steamer, found that the work had been completed two hours before, though previous experience with that vessel , had led them to suppose that two shifts would be wanted. On September 27th, 1908, Croft wrote to the Minister reminding him of his invitation to inventors, and submitting Ti description of improvement, with statements of its demonstrated success. Ho concluded by stating that if the Minister ri.ould find his claim a just one, he begged to apply for whatever reward might be thought appropriate. Mr Croft had, however, forgotten that there was such a thing as "red tape" to be reckoned with. Satisfied that li 3 had done his duty, and knowing he had evolved a practical idea of s>lne value, he apparently believed he had only,to mention the matter in order to be piomptly thanked and duly tewarded. for his work. But, according to the "Review," Croft's communication was referred by the Minister to tiie General Manager/ and transmitted by that gentleman to the workshop foreman at Grey mouth, who forthwith wrote to the casual fitter in terms whi^h suggested,, that he (the foreman) had no knowledge of the improvement said to have been effected in the working of the hydraulic crane. It is said that Croft had personally mentioned the alteration of the crane to his foreman, arid that gentleman had not dissented to his subordinate's suggestion ; but in his communication to tho inventor he asked for "a full detailed report of the alteration," and also for a sketch of the spmc Crcft replied to the effect that as he had applied to the Minister for Railways for reward for what he claimed to .be fa . material, improvement" he wished >to defer supplying, the foreman with the information/ and sketch asked: for pending ..a reply from the Minister. . He? offered, however, to supply the fofemann with an exact copy of his application,;, to the Minister. Then toll owe dlthe] ■following official correspondence:— I

Casual Fitter S. V. Croft, - Greyn-outh. Your replj* -to my memo, of Septem-, ber 20 is not satisfactory. 'Please supply the information aske.d for at onco.. W. J. WATSON, , , - W.S. Foreman. October o, 1908. " ' October'j,"lDoS. ' W. J Watson, Esq., Workshops Foreman. Dear Sir, —Re your m.emo v of -to-day, I bog to state that I have had jno reply from the Honourable Minister for Railways, and defer supplying yoiiVwith information, sketch, regarding 'improvement in No. 1 hydraulic crane.pending that reply.—l have the honcttiv t» be ? .Sir, ''"■■ ' .. r'-'.---" r - Your obedient servant, . :, S. V. CROFT. "* Casual Fitter S. V. Croft, Groymouth. Further to my memos. of 29/9/03 and 5/10 03, I have been instructed to call upon yon for an fxplanation as to why, without authority, you -made an alteration in No; 1 hydraulic crane. Kindly reply at o'neef . ■"J< "~"y ■■- fv: d>] W. J. WATSON, ~.- a 1 " W.S. Foreman. October 5, 1908. -f October 5, 1908: Dear Sir,—ln reply to your second memo, of to-day, I beg to take exception to the domineering, dogmatic, and despotic manner in which 'you have threatened to suspend me for not supplying you with the.detailed information and sketch of the improvement made by me in the turning movement of No. 1 hydraulic crane. As to making an alteration without authority, I beg to state that it was my duty to work faithfully, as I. thought, to the advantage of the Department. , I •challenge vo.u or any other individual to dispute whether my work has not been advantageous.—l have the honour to be, Sir, Your obedient servant.

S. V. CROFT. Casual Fitter S. V. Croft,

Greymouth. Please note that you are suspended from to-day until further notice for refusing to comply with my meihos. of 29/9/08 and 5/10/08, re alterationa-jmade by you to No. 1 hydraulic crane. * W. J. WATSON, v ~t n r:. W.S. Poremaj*.

October 5, 1908. ' ..,->■ T.n concluding its recital of this sorry incident the "Rev^y" reports that subsequent representations to the general manager of tha, A.S.R.S. enabled the real position to be gauged at headquarters at last, and Croft, who had be on under suspension frcm October sth,. was reinstated eleven days later. Hocompiaineci. however, that his working conditions were made intolerable, ho w-as not allowed to go near the crane on which he had displayed exceptional ability, and the pay lost through suspension was not refunded, though the unfortunate man got into furthor hot water through demanding it. "You are not entitled to pay during suspension" was all the explanation he could extract from his hostile superior. They were badly at loggerheads, and a Departmental inquiry was held by two first division officers, which resulted m Croft's dismissal. As a casual employes Croft is Tinable to take his case to tho Appeal Board. This ca<e serve? to show the wisdom of those who have claimed that the inquiry which is to be conducted as the outcome of the Addington allegations should be of a thoroughly comprehensive character. We have, of course., sti'l to hear the* oth-r s'd * < f tho story, but on the face of the evidence published by th-e 'Review" ther_* i«. at jeast some justification for th.3 assumption that tho wiso policy of encouraging the railway employees to Bse their brains for the benefit of the service, which the -Minister sought to inaugurate in 1908, is not meeting with tho approval of somVof .his responsible subordinates. Croft's reluctance to "t:i .j

away" his invention is easily understandable, and is undoubtedly much

moro reasonable than his foreman's bombastic demand to know why, without authority, a mere casual fitter Jiad dared to make an improvement in a. pieco of Stats-ownel machinery. It seems to us that the case is one calling for further invesTigation.