ELLIOT STANDFIELD’S CASE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20833, 27 September 1929, Page 6

ELLIOT STANDFIELD’S CASE.

DISCUSSED BY HOSPITAL BOARD. REQUEST FOR CLOTHING REFUSED. GRANTED USE OF BLANKETS. The monthly meeting of the Otago Hospital Board,' which was held last evening, was particularly placid and devoid of incident until the secretary | read a letter, from Elliott Standfield requesting that the board give him a pair of blankets. The majority of the members remembered the applicant as one who had proved a storm centre at more than one previous board meeting, and his Marathon sojourn of 25 years in the Benevolent Institution was still green in their memories, which probably accounted for the chilly silence that fell on the meeting after the letter had been read. • With a- view, probably, to averting any disturbance of the harmony of the meeting, Mr W. B, Morgan moved—- “ That the letter bo referred to the Benevolent Committee M —the motion being seconded by Mr D. McLennan. Mr R. W. Hall, however, considered that the matter should not be' decided on such an offhand manner, and suggested, if the mover and seconder were agreeable, it should be, held over until the Benevalent Committee’s report came before the meeting, pointing out that a further request for assistance for Standfield was mentioned in the report. Mr Morgan and Mr M'Lennan agreed to this course.

On the adoption of the committee’s report being moved by Mr J. W. Scurr, Mr Hall moved as an amendment—- “ That the clause declining Elliott Standfield’s application for clothes be deleted.” Standfield’s case, he ss>d, was not a new one, and he thought that it was adding insult to injury to aefuse him clothing. It was a known fact that Standfield was a creature of circumstances; —circumstances for which the board was largely responsible. Of late he had lived on the charity of social workers, and although the board already made him a small allowance, this would not keep him in clothes as well as food. Standfield was a case for. the institution; in fact, there were men at present in the home who were not so desei% r ing as be. I “ Show them to us,” interjected Mr Scurr. Mr Hall; I could do that.

It was all very well, continued Mr Hall, to eay that Standfield would not work, but where was the man who would give him work? The board as a.body which was_ supposed to have at.,heart ’ the well-being of those who were down and out, should care for the man: until it had been proved that he was able to r ' get work and could do it. He should be given some clothes and some blankets too.

The chairman (Mr W. E. S. Knight) remarked that ' the only sympathy he felt for Standfield was that no one would employ him. After all, if the board had to supply him. with clothes and food, it might be cheaper to maintain him in the Benevolent Institution. Mr Qallaway seconded the amendment.

Air Morgan said he had a certain amount of sympathy with Standfield, but he could not follow Air Hall’s argument. Standfield had been offered work and had refused it. If he would not help himself there was no reason why the board should stand by ,him. As a trustee of the public’s money, &ftid ilr Scurr, he could not support the amendment. He had no sympathy with a big, strong man who was not willing to work, and who, moreover, had been certified by two medical men M- perfectly .fit.. When women came to the hoard for assistance for themselves and. their children, they were given a mere pittance, and were often asked if they could not give some service in exchange. “ I am not willing,” declared Mr Scurr, "to spend the board‘s money in helping this man, but I am prepared, if the mover seconder of the amendment will put in their share, to pay part of the cost of an outfit for him.” Mr Scurr’s offer passed unheeded. Dr Newlanda considered that Etandwas unfortunate in his advocates. Mr Hall bad made statements he could hot substantiate, ■ and Air Gallaway was just as far off the track. The facts were that Standfield had been kept in •the institution because he was supposed to be suffering from fits. These fits had never materialised, and eventually he made himself such a nuisance that the authorities had to get rid of him. The man was undeserving of consideration and he (Dr Newlands) would far sooner see the members of the board give something personally than misappropriate its funds so obviously. Mr Hall: If Standfield cannot do ativthtng to-day, it is the board’s fault. It is obvious that a good deal of prejudice in regard to him exists in the minds of the chairman of the board and the chairman of the Benevolent Committee. For a young man such as he was 25 years ago to go into an institution with a lot of old men shows that he was not mentally sound. Air Quelch said he thought thut tho board might give Standfield blankets. The amendment was then put to the meeting and was lost, the report beine adopted. *

Air Quelch then moved:. That the application for blankets die granted and that they be handed to the Rev. F G Bryan King on behalf of Standfield’ Dr Newlands seconded the motion, which was carried,