THE Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 1892. DEATH FROM STARVATION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2373, 23 June 1892, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 1892. DEATH FROM STARVATION.

Nor long ago it was our painful duty to chronicle the death of a poor woman who died for want of food in Christchurch. Her husband had gone to the North Island to look for work : she was left destitute, and when discovered she was in such a miserable condition that she was removed to the hospital where she died, as the doctor affirmed, of starvation. A day or two ago another poor woman passed away under similar circumstances. She was a very respectable single woman, and earned her own livelihood until about twelve months ago when she fell into ill-health and had not the strength to work any longer. She was reduced to such penury that one night she had not whereon to lay her head, and went to sleep in the park, and only was saved from starving by falling in with a good Samaritan — a Mrs Anderson, who with her children lived in a three-roomed cottage. Airs Anderson succored her for a time until she got some work to do. and then she took lodgings, out of which she was ejected a few days ago because she was ton shillings behind hand with her rent. She went back to Airs Anderson again where she died, as the doctor again affirmed, of starvation. Now both these women were undoubtedly respectable, yet both died for want of food in the heart of the city of Christchurch. Death from starvation is a terrible thing to contemplate : and it is awful to think that it occurs in this, as it is called, Christian country. it is said that both refused to apply for Charitable Aid until they were so weak that they could not go to the office, and in that respect they were wrong, but we are not surprised that people hesitate before appealing to these institutions. It is really a misnomer to call them charitable : they have no right to the name, for anything they give is given grudgingly and with as much reluctance as if it had been the life-blood of the dispensers of it. It is, therefore, not surprising that sensitive persons hesitate before submitting themselves to the humiliatiem to which they are subjected by the dispensers of Charitable Aid, and doubtless many are suffering the pangs of hunger in con.-: sequence of this. Hut what more can we expect. The dispensers of Charitable Aid are not selected because of their known benevolence or kindly disposition towards the poor. They are selected not to dispense charity but to “ save the money of the ratepayers.” That is the aim and object of members of Charitable Aid Boards, n to save the money of the ratepayers,” and charity arpl the succor of the poor is altogether a secondary consideration. But it is not the fault' of the board,_ they are elected to buvq the money of tljc ratepayers,” and they do it. They will say very little about the death of these poor women, but if they discovered one person in receipt of Charitable Aid who was not entitled to if; their voices would be heard violently prose.stlng against such iniquity. it is far a JnOlffi serious thing in their eyes that one should ' impose upon them, than that twenty should starve for want of food. (Still they only do their duty, and they are not to blame. It is our social system that is wrong, and it Duo use to blame anything else, I nder it nothing else is possible, HU'! s'R’h things will occur so long as it lasts.