THE EDITOR, Sir:I READ with interest your article of January 15/04 captioned "Children born out of wedlock" are still "bastards" and was reminded of a personal experience many moons ago.
Following the loss at sea of a Jamaican fishing boat along with its entire crew, a public appeal for funds was launched to assist the families of the deceased. The name of the boat was Snow Boy, so the appeal was obviously entitled "The Snow Boy Fund." Substantial funds were donated by the public, which were then matched by the Government of Jamaica led at the time by the inimitable Alexander Bustamante.
A committee was then established to administer the fund, which was chaired by Mrs. Leighton (Bunny) Clarke, a prominent personality of the era, and included among others such notables as Mr. Theodore Sealy, Editor of the Gleaner and Mr. J. J. Mills, a well known personage in the field of education. I was invited to join this illustrious company and proudly accepted the honour.
When this committee began considering the claims and entitlements to the funds it was revealed that the captain of the boat not only had a wife and some children in Montego Bay, he also had a 'puncie' and children in Kingston. He of course was not alone in such a situation, but he was the most prodigious of the lot. This situation posed somewhat of a problem.
As a neophyte on the matter of social mores of the land I ventured the suggestion that perhaps only the legitimate children of the fishermen should be considered eligible for the benefits of the fund.
While this aspect of the matter was about to be discussed at the following day's meeting, the committee was promptly informed that "The Chief" did not consider any children illegitimate. The net result of the message being, that every known child of every lost Snow Boy fisherman benefited from the fund in some way. In a few instances, support payments were carried out over a period of about 16 years by a prominent financial institution of the day. I might add too that to the best of my knowledge no fees were ever levied against the Fund for services rendered by that institution over the lengthy period required for distribution of the funds.
I certainly have no quarrel with the comments of the Resident Magistrate Ken Brown, but if the Prime Minister of the realm about 40 years ago deemed it appropriate to declare there is no such thing as an illegitimate child why then should any child now be labelled with such an abject and degrading description through no fault of its own?
I am, etc.,
R. M. BAILEY
Mammee Bay
St. Ann
