The Portland daily press., 1894-08-01
EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY.

EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY.
Some weeks ago both branches of the
city council passed an order to pay the
Eye and Ear Infrmary $1,000 for the pur-
pose of building an elevator, but Mayor
Baxter vetoed the order and it failed to
pass over his veto. On Monday night
Alderman Thompson introduced the fol-
lowing order:
Ordered That the city treasurer be and
hereby is authorized to pay TO the Treas
urer of the Name Eye and Ear Infirmary
the sum of $1,000 for the maintenance of
a day dispensary for one year in the out
patient department of the Infirmary,
supplemented with board. nursing and
treatment in the impatient department
for the relief of those who are under the
care of, and are charge upon, the
city.
There are some very peculiar things
about this order. In the first place it
will be noticed. that the sum wanted for
the maintenance of this dispensary work
is the exact sum that was wanted for
an elevator In the second place the
order is exceedingly indefinite except
upon the point that the city shall pay to
the Eye and Ear Infrmary $1,000. There
it is clear enough. 1t is in the nature of
contract. the city agreeing to pay
$1,000 for something that is vaguely
described as daily dispensary in the
out-patient department., supplemented
by board, treatment and nursing in the
impatient department, for the relief of
those who are under the care of the city.
The city already maintains a city ply
sician, whose duty it is to visit and pre-
scribe for the INDECENT sick, it maintains
a hospital to which when occasion re-
quires the sick can be removed and cared
for, and it has a board of overseers of
the poor authorized to expend money
for medical treatment of people who can
not pay for themselves. Here would
seem to be adequate provision for the
INDECENT sick. But now it is proposed to
pay TO the Eye and Ear Infrmary $1,000
in advance for work not specifically de-
within the control of the Infirmary,
with no price specified for board, urs-
ing or treatment The city practically
says to the Inirlnary stake this $1,000,
give in return for it whatever you think
proper, charge what rates you please for
board, and for nursing and for treat
ment, we leave it entirely to you." Now
we say that no'city council has moral
right to make any such contract as that.
The money they are expanding is not
their money, ut.the money of the tax
payers committed to them on the under
standing that they will spend it for none
but legal purposes, that they will ex
pend it with discretion and economy, anc
| that they will see that the taxpayers get
| an adequate return for it. They have
practically turned this money over to q
corporation in no way under their contro
on a loose understanding that it shall
| be expended for the medical treatment O.
| the poor of the city. This corporation
can charge for board whatever it pleases
| for nursing whatever it pleases, and fol
| medical treatment whatever it pleases
and there will be no power in any city
| officer to question their rates. 1t il
| to be paid IN advance for work indei
pite and uncertain, and it is to be pait
| for this indefinite and uncertain worl
curiously enough, just the sum it want
| ed and didn't get to pay for an elevator
This infrmary already gets $4,000 yea
from the State largely on the grount
that it does charitable work. Of thi
sum the Guy of Portland contribute
| about one-eighth. That is it's share
1 Furthermore the work that the Infrm
airy is now asking th e city to pay for i
work which it practically agreed witt
the State should be done for nothing
The second paragraph of its constitution
reads as follows
l. 2. Object. The object of the corpora
tion shall be the establishment ant
maintenance of an infirmary in Port
land, Maine, where daily clinic ma
be held for the treatment, free of charge
of poor persons throughout the State
suffering from diseases of the eye an
ear.
Why, the aoor of Portland shout
be charged for, and the poor of the res
of the State be treated free, it is not cas-
to see. Such an arrangement seems to b
grossly unjust to the taxpayers of Port
land, and ought not to have been assent
ed to by the city council. While legal
it may not be SO indefensible as the bal
proposition to appropriate $1,000 for a
elevator, M orally it is not one whit bel
ter under all the circumstances. Tha
the Mayor will veto it we do not for