The Wanganui Herald. [PUBLISHED DAILY.] MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1911. A CASE TO ANSWER.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXXVI, Issue 13330, 20 March 1911, Page 4

The Wanganui Herald. [PUBLISHED DAILY.] MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1911. A CASE TO ANSWER.

A few weeks ago the Hon. J. A Millar, Minister of Railways, was severely taken to task for sanctioning the appointment of his son as assistant electrician and draughtsman in the railway service, over the heads, it was alleged, of others more entitled to the position. The Minister made a spirited reply to his critics, in the course of which he said: “I was advised to send to the Old Country for a man, a salary of .£4OO being mentioned. On the recommendation of the officer of the Department, my son, who is an associate of the Society of Electrical Engineers, and who has gone through both theoretical and practical courses, was recommended for appointment, not at my request, as I never asked or wrote or suggested it. The recommendation came along to me that he was qualified for the position. I'was informed that there was no other man in the service with the qualifications necessary. I certainly chink it better where appointments are to be filled and where we have New Zealand-born youths who have the qualifications, that they ought to get preference, irrespective of whose son it may be. If the fact ot my being a Minister of the Crown is going to debar my children from the ordinary avenues of employment open to every person in New Zealand, I am not going to stand in their way by remaining Minister. It will be observed that Mr Millar makes a, definite statement that ;iis son was recommended for the position by the officer (presumably the officer in charge) of the Department, and that he was informed there was no other man in the Department with the necessary qualifications. These statements are either true or false. If true, both the Minister 1 and his sou arc much, maligned, alnd some members of the railway service should be taken severely to task for, persisting in publicly, declaring that the statements arc false. If on the other hand, the Minister has been misled—for, we refuse to believe that Mr Millar would deliberately say what he believed and knew to be untrue—then some further explanation is necessary, and those who misled the Minister in such an important matter should be called upon to show cause why they should not lie reprimanded. In the February issue of the N.Z. Railway Officers’ Advocate a correspondent, signing himself “Searchlight,” referring to the appointment of Mr Millar, jun., emphatically asserts that “to say that there mre no fully qualified men available is to state what is untrue,” He goes on to say that “attached to the electrical enginer’a branch are expert men, trained in the best colleges and technical schools of England, ( and holding diplomas of undoubted merit —men who have cast off as worthless more

knowledge of electric plant than the Minprotege can ever attain.” And he further infers that the new appointee was forced into the position in spite of the protests of the heads of the engineering branch. In the March issue of the Kailway Advocate “Searchlight” returns to the charge, and reiterates his previous contentions that young Millar has an insufficient knowledge of electrical engineering: that there are fully qualified men already in the Department available to (ill any now position; and that the Minister's sou was promoted into the position in spite of the protest of the'head'of the branch. 1 lie says that the man required as assistant to the engineer was one capable of taking up .signalling and interlocking work, of which he declares Mr Millar’s son has had absolutely no experience. He asserts that in the branch concerned arc men who have served their full apprenticeship in England and New Zealand, and whose lifelong study has been electric, work—men with fifteen, twenty, and thirty years’ experience. And he asks why the appointment was not given to the Chief Elcclrican, who he says it is well-known is the next in order for promotion in the electrical branch. “Searchlight" adds that if Mr Millar proves him wrong in his assertion that his son was promoted in spite of the protest of the head of the branch, and shows that previous to flic appointment being made young, Millar was certified by the Chief Engineer as fit to assume the duties he is supposed to fill, he (“Searchlight”) will make a suitable apology through the Railway Advocate. There is one other aspect of the matter (hat might also be better -understood if a little more light were thrown upon it, and it is this: How is it that Mr Millar, jnnr., received leave of absence for two or more years to .study electrical work in tbc Old Laud, when about the same time a similar application for twelve months’ leave of absence without pay —to get experience in electrical work and come back to the Department when experience was gained—was promptly declined by the management to a Wanganui applicant, though the leave was recommended by the engineer in charge? Bumble seems to have been at work, and the ways of the Department or of some Departmental officers should form the subject of inquiry.