FAMILY LIVED IN CARAVAN

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 15, 13 October 1943, Page 6

FAMILY LIVED IN CARAVAN

Chief Justice’s Comment

“It is not creditable to our social system or to the authorities that a thing like this should be allowed to exist,” said the Chief Justice (Sir Alichael Alyers) when evidence was submitted in the Supreme Court, AVellington, yesterday by Mr. G. C. Kent, on behalf of Eric AVheaton, 29, motor driver in the R.N.Z.A.F., who appeared for sentence on two charges ot stealing cars, that prisoner, his wife and three children had liad at one stage to live in a caravan, and later in a city olhee ■because of failure to obtain a State house. Air. Kent said that about four years ago prisoner was living in a house in the suburbs which wds condemned. He could not get other accommodation, but, having a caravan in the driveway alongside the house, shifted into it with his family and lived in it at Aliramar for about 18 months. The youngest _ child was born while they were occupying the caravan. It had no heating or other amenities and much the same condition existed when they later moved into, two office rooms in Boulcott Street.

Prisoner had had to send his two youngest children to a home, and he was now living with his wife and the eldest child, aged eight, in a privately owned flat, said Mr. Kent. The conditions under which the five of them had been living had preyed on his mind, and he had committed the offence with the idea of being able to pay a deposit on a house. His chief concern was for the children. Remarking that he would remand prisoner for a week so that all the available and relevant information could be obtained, his Honour said he would not say that anyone was to blame, but he would like to know why a man with a wife and three children could not get a home; whether there were so many other, families ahead of them, or whether there was a priority list for families. All those factors might have some bearing on the way prisoner should be dealt with. “It may be that, there are many thousands of people with families of three or four or - more looking for homes,” said his Honour. He did not know whether they got preference or not, but it did seem extraordinary that a man with a family could not get a State house. The answer might be that there were so many applications for State houses that all could not be provided, but he would like to know if there were any reason in prisoner’s case.

Prisoner made a statement from the dock that when he applied for a State house in 1941 he had made it clear that ho was living in a caravan. Mr. Kent added that a statement from the State Advances Department bore this out. “I on must, not think that because you have been living in a caravan you were justified in stealing other people’s cars,” said his Honour when remanding prisoner.