Connecticut western news., 1891-06-03
A PERTINENT QUERY.

Large S1Ze DUG. ana Dl.UU.
 PERTINENT QUERY.
 Will someone rise up and explain the true inwardness of the withdrawal of the dependent and neglected children of the county from the Gilbert Home? MT Gilbert left munifcent bequest for the home that bears his name. and we are unable to see the reason why the county should not continue to take ad- vantage of it. It is generally under stood that the children were we'll cared for at Winsted. Why should the county be to the expense of $65OO to buy place in Canaan under these condi- tions?-Torrington Register.
 The above query comes to us in the Register with cross mark directing our attention to probably because the Register had an idea that the Citi- zen office was in possession of facts which might explain the removal of the children from the Home.
 We are aware that other newspapers beside the Register are growing curious over the removal, and some of them are asking why it was necessary to remove the children and to expend large sum of money for home, when they were we'll cared for at the Gilbert Home. These children are the children of the County Temporary Home, while the Gilbert Home is an institution of per- manent character, and intended to fur nish permanent homes for the children consigned to it's care. For some reason, from the start even, the Legislature was opposed to putting the children. of the county in the Gilbert Home, as were. the State Board, and all the members of the County Board of Commissioners, except Commissioner Dunning. Through him way was found to have the children consigned to the Gilbert Home.
 After they were there matron was appointed by Commissioner Dunning, and by virtue of her appointment she assumed charge over the county child ren, although they were in the Gilbert Home. This produced certain amount of friction, because the superintendent of the home, very justly it would seem proposed to exercise guardianship and care over all the inmates of the home. Naturally it would seem as though that was what he was there for. The fric- tion did not grow less, and Commis- sioner Cunning sustained the matron in the demands for the care of the l children, while the trustee of the Gill bert estate sustained the superinten- | dent, or in other words the policy of the commissioner was carried out by Matron Roys and the policy of trustee of the Home by Superintendent Case. The friction grew worse, in consequence | of an alleged attempt to prescribe a bill | of fare for the children of the County Temporary Home, in the Gilbert Home. It is alleged that only suggestions were made as to bill of fare, vice versa I it is alleged that bill of fare was &C., tually submitted.
 These little matters produced cer- tain amount of friction, but inasmuch as the children belong to a temporary home, and the place where they were ] cared for was permanent home, per- 1 haps no more than might naturally be | expected where the matron of the child ren accompanied them to an institution which was under some one else's con- troll
 The children were only placed in the Gilbert Home temporarily, and the law is such that they could not be perma- nently placed in the Gilbert Home. | Eventually they would have to be re- moved. But it would seem that while they were there, and until tue county
 Was able to provide for them, no inter- ference whatever should have ensued in their care at the Home by the auth
 critics of the county temporary home. 1 We make these statements, believing
 them to be fair and unprejudiced, and
 because the newspapers around the state are beginning to take up the sub- 1 ject, and it is better that the facts as
 here given should be published, than
 that all sorts of idle gossip, most of it \ of harmful character, should be giveu
 broad cast.-Wiusted Citizen.