The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1888. CHARITABLE AID IMPOSTERS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1945, 15 September 1888, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1888. CHARITABLE AID IMPOSTERS

The facts brought to light m a receri ease m Auckland where an old couple m receipt of charitable aid were possessec of landed property, go to show that ii the public dispensation of charity thi officers whose duty it is to give relic are often misled or misinformed on th< cases whioh come before them. In th< case m qnestion, Mr Strathern, Visiting Oscejr tp jihp^ Auckland Hpspitaj anc Charitable Aid Board, applied, undei the Destitute Persons Act, section 38, for a warrant, authorising the Board tc sell by public ajjetion. pertain freehold allotments, situated m George street, Ponsonby, the property of George and Elisabeth Day. In speaking m support of the application, Mr Strathern stated that Mr and Mrs Day were advanced m years, and unable to make a living. tha iastr ten years they b&d been m receipt of relief, and dqripg that time they took a trip to Europe and subsequently returned again. Sincb then they have been m receipt of relief. In all probability they would be a burden npoa tf)e county for tlje remainder of fcheir liveß. At present; the old peqplp might at any time sell the property, and the Board thought it was but just it phould go towards their maintenance, Mrs Day is fifty-five yeays of age, and her husband ten years older. Mrs Day had made applications for relief several times which were granted. The earnings of the old couple amounted to one shilling and sixpence per week from mangling, and jijbey pepji Cutting ffoftt. the Boa,rd what kept them comfortably sfnpo 18^2. Resides the properties which the Board wished to procure authority to sell, the old couple had money derived from the sale of allotments quite recently $nd part of whicji went td clefraj the expense >f a voyage Home and back; ' The Eoprd has the power tp sell the property ( pi applipants fop cjiarjt&ble ajd, In this case the Board was willing to allow the proceeds of sale to go to the support of the Days without plaimtag for what had been expended on thoir maintenance. The old couple strenuously opposed the application to sell, and the old lady m particular, Beems toh&Yeheen unduly excited over the proposal, fche said emphatically that the allotment belonged to her when she first wet^t for relief. She was advised to do so, and did not know the property would be taken to pay for it. Why was it a loan and not relief? Why was she npt told she wpnld have top»y for relief? Eta* & tow' ft*.

yould not havo taken one penny. They » lad gone Uorae as she thought herhus)and's eyoßight might be cured, but he ?ras now quite blind. If she had known ibout this having to pay for relief she jould have sold her house and gona Home again when they could have got wore money for it. They had not given ler any notice that it must be paid back igain. bhe was not like any Irish tenant that might be evicted, t^he jrould not have her property taken from ber. It was a snare, and not relief. This kind of thing was no encouragement to poor people to get a bib of property. When asked if she did not think it was wrong to take public charity when she had means of her own, she replied that she did not look at it m that light. It was not charity evidently ; it was merely a loan. How the case may go we have no prediction to make. It is the first of the kind brought and it will He a pity if it should not be successful for then imposters upon public charity would not be so likely to come for, aid when they had property of their own to fall back on. In the distribution of charitable aid, cases of the kind referred to are unfortunately only too common, but this is the first occasion on which a decisive stand has been made .by a Board dispensing public charity. The Destitute Persons Aot 1887 puts it m the power of the Board to order the sale of property held by recepients .of state aid and it further provides that m the sale of the property the proceeds atter payment of expenses are to be applied to the maintenance of its former owner at a rate not exceeding £2 per week. It is hard enough on the colony to support really deserving poor, but when aid is given to people who are well able to maintain themselves by the sale of their freeholds the line should be distinctly drawn.