CHANGES APPROVED

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27404, 1 June 1950, Page 8

CHANGES APPROVED

Dunkley Children’s Homes SUPREME COURT ACTION Mr Justice Kennedy, in the Supreme Court yesterday, approved of an order made by the Dunkley Children’s Temporary Homes, Incorporated, formerly the Children’s Rest Home (Residential Bursaries), Incorporated, under the provisions of the Religious, Charitable and Educational Trusts Act, 1908, and its amendments, in respect of the disposition of certain property and assets held for charitable purposes. The defendant was the Attorney-general. Mr G. T. Baylee appeared for the plaintiffs.

Mr Baylee explained that in 1916 Mr Sidney Dunkley was engaged in business in Dunedin and later he commenced to organise the Anglican Boys’ Home. Because of the influenza epidemic in 1918 the home took in a number of children whose parents had been incapacitated by the epidemic. -The home was then required for the purposes for which it was founded, and Mr Dunkley organised a temporary home, acquiring a pro-, perty in Mornington. It was considered, however, that it would be better to build a home. The family of Kate Mary Hill Jack informed plaintiff in 1929 that they were having difficulty in carrying out the trusts of their late mother’s will and they suggested that plaintiff should build its new home on the trust property, at Highgate, known as Romanoff. This was agreed to, the Mornington property Being sold.

Mr Baylee said that with the outbreak of the last war there was less demand for the society’s services and there was also great difficulty in obtaining staff. As a result, the society had to make temporary arrangements for boarding out childen. The Otago Hospital Board was anxious to obtain the property, but the society had no power of sale or lease, but the board took it over under the Hospital Accommodation Emergency Regulations, 1940. The board then leased the property for a term of 30 years under a section in the Local Legislation Act, 1946. Under ,the Public Works Act it was taken for a maternity home and vested in the board. The society, being deprived _of its property, was not in a position _to carry out the work it had been doing for some time and it was necessary to submit to the court the present scheme. This would place the society in the position it had been in before acquiring the Romanoff property; that was, the right to board out children coming under its care. The homes, counsel explained, were carefully selected and the children were under the care of the Child Welfare Department.

An order was also made for the payment of £19.000 compensation to the plaintiff society by the Public Trustee. Mr G. A. Revell, who appeared for the Public Trustee, submitted to the order.