PRIVATE BENEFIT SOCIETIES.

Auckland Star, Volume XXVIII, Issue 151, 1 July 1897, Page 2

PRIVATE BENEFIT SOCIETIES.

ROYAL COMMISSION.

After wo wonb to press yesterday, the following evidence was taken in connection with the Colonial Sugar Oompany'a Societies :—

Fredk. Hubble, who kept bha books of the Provident Fund, in furtherexaminabion, Baid he had never known of any compulsion for wanes men to join the Fund. The petition againsb the Pnvafco Benetib Societies Bill of 1896 was nob promoted by the Company. He did not think there would be any objection to the registration of the Fund if fehe constitution was nob interfered with by Parliament. He signed the petition, and thought that the Bill meant that the men would have control of the money. At present the Company contributed one half. Witness read the firsb actual investigation on the working of the Provident Fund for the five years ended 30th June, 1895, by Mr Moors, who reported thab the fund was at present sufficient to allow of pensions to be paid to members entitled to such at) the rate of 1-100 th for each year of semee. There were two widowß who received benefit from the fund. There was ona widow who received a lump sum. In answer to Mr Fisher, the witneßß said bhab fehe men had no control over the fund. Ife was only compulsory for the salaried officers of the Company to join the fund. Mr Tregear drow attention to l9ie fact that in accordance with the constitution of the society the employees as shareholders to the extent of £22,000 were in the evenb of the downfall of the Company also equally responsible for the remaining £22,000 invested in the concern—which took the form of a floating fund.

Mr Fisher: We have evidence before us that officers of the Bank of Now Zealand are compelled to contribute to a fund for bhe benefit of 12 pensioners. Doea ib not appear io you that bhe position is about) the same here? Wibness: Well, Ido not know that anyone is drawing a pension ab present. Of course ib may be so. Mr Fisher: Does ib appear to you thab ib will probably work oub that) way? Witness: Of course it is hard to say what may be done. Of course members keep on leaving, which benefits bhuse who remain.

Major Stoward said it appeared to him that the whole thing was a liberal arrangement. If a man wanted to get oub of it he could get his money back. There was no need to join unless he liked. Samuel 8. Kinnaird, sugar boiler for the Company for 19 years, said he only belonged to the Providanb Fund. He thought the fund was received favourably by bhe majority. He signed the petition againsb the Bill. He thought the Provident Fund was a good thing, and he did nob want to see ib destroyed. Hi* idea wrb thab if bhe Bill became law they would have to give up the fund, and the branch would be destroyed. There was no compulsion in signing the petition, as alleged by Me-Laut.-lilan. He did nob join the Benefit Society because he was otherwise provided for. He waß a member of Cha local Committee.

Thoß. Webb, contractor for stowing, ebc, at the Sugarwerka for a number of years, said he had not seen the petition McLaughlan sont to the House. He had never known the Company to use any compulsion for workmen to join the Society. He had never known McLnughlan to tell an untruth. He thought a lot of bhe naen " egffed " him on witii regard ko the petition. He signed the first petition at his own free will. Those who did not Bign were called in by Mr Miller, the manager, and asked the reason why they did not sign. When the mot) saw that McLaughlan had signed a telegram to tho Premier congratulating him on the buccosb of the Bill they know he would get the " run." There had been growling among bhe mon about) the Provident Fund because they had nob sufficient control over it.

The Commission then ro.se.

ROYAL COMMISSION.

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS,

The Commission resumed this morning. BANK OF NEW ZEALAND PROVIDENT TUND.

Mr Fisher said thab with regard to the anonymous letter sent to Major Steward he thought it would be better tor Mr Kane, Secretary of the Commission, to wait upon the accountanb of the bank or some other responsible officer, and ask him to give the names of any persons willing to give evidence in the matter of the Provident Fund. This was agreed bo.

The following letter waa read and minuted as part of the proceedings of the Commission :— " Chairman of Private Benefit Societies' Royal Commission.— Dear Bir, —In view of the enquiry ab preaenb taking place into the working of Private Benefit Societies, it was my intention as as an ex-member of the Bank of New Zealand Provident Fund of over 14 years' standing to have tendered evidence, but having been suddenly called away on urgenb business to tho Great Barrier, from which place I cannoD return to town before Thursday, the Boh July, I beg to submit my statement in writing, and shall be prepared, if necessary, to subsequently confirm tbe same on oath. 1 jciided the Bank of New Zealand in 1882, and regularly paid my subscription to the Bank's Providonc Fund, of which I had been forced to become a member, until February. 1895, when I resigned. In May, 1896, I rejoined tho service at the Blenheim branch, and my interoab in the fund was revived. Aboub three months ago, owing to tho death of my mother at Auckland, I waa compelled to immediately proceed to that city to attend to the funeral, wind up the estate and look after my unmarried sisters, who were without a protector. For this purpose I applied at the head office for transfer to the Auckland branch, an arrangemenb which the local accountanb assured me could easily have been carried out, or at any rate for two or three weeks leave to enable me to adjust matters. My application was in both cases refused and I was consequently obliged bo bender my resignation. Before I could draw the salary due to me I was forced bo sign a memo, resigning all intoreet in the Providonb Fund. 1 would particularly point out that my membership to the Provident Fund was under protest, and my resignation as an oflicer of the Bank conpulsory under the circumstances, and I thoreforo consider thab in the evont of tho fund being split up, I am morally entitled to Bomo compensation, at any rato a refund of my contributions.—Yours faithfully Henry Winkelmann.

Mr Walter J. .Moore, of Christchurch, wrote thab in the intorests of ex-ofiicora of the Bank of New Zealand who have voluntarily retired without receiving any benefits from the Provident Fund, that under clause 7 of tho deed of seotleraent it is provided that tho intoreat acquired by any officor who might resign should revive immediately upon his re-appointmenb. Ho held that every person who baa contributed, unless he be debarred by age or other cuueas from re-entering tho eorvioe, has a contingent interest in tho fund and consequently that tho division of tho assets amongst the present officials (which he understood has been proposed) would be a very inequitable proceeding. He thought tho light way of dealing with the matter would be to divide tho assets amongati all who havo contributed in proportion to the payments exacted by the Bank.

THE COLONIAL SOGAR COMPANY'S SOCIETIES Evidence was resumed.

Kichard John Moberley, labourer ab the Colonial Sugar Company for three years and dive months, said he bolongod to both the Benefit Society and Provident Fund, He had heard some of the men grumbling about tho Provident Fund. The men were not compelled to join. He signed tho petition against Mr Seddon's Private Benefit Societies Bill in 1896. He would not like to say anything about McLaughlan and the petition. He had heard it said that the Company would rather retain men in their employ who were mombei'B of the Society. No compulsion was used for him to Bl'gn against Mr Seddon's Bill.

Alex. Rollo, masbor mariner, over seven years in tho employ of tho Sugar Company and trading from Sugarworks Wharf to Quoon-atreob Wharf, said he did not belong to either of the societies. Ho had been asked frequently to join. Ho was insured in the A.M.P. Oilico and had enough to keep up.

Mr Fisher said Mr Rollo was nob a workman iv tho works, so that his evidence was not material.

John Henry Stubbs, engineer in the employ of the Company, bbicl he belonged to the Benefit Society. Ho had declined to join tho Provident Fund because he could not afford it.

Wm. J. W. Philaon, mannger in New Zealand of the Colonial Sugur Refining Company, said that nearly all of the men belonged to the Benefit Fund. At first they tound the man did nob take to the Provident Fund. Tho Company pub it down to carelessness on the men's part. Younger men did nob think of making provision for tho future. The Provident Fund was not entirely in the hands of the Company, for on the Board of Trustees there wore three who represented three departments of the busineue. Probably the men were chosen because they were tho moat intelligenn of tho branches of tho Company. The money of the fund was in the Company's debentures, becauee id was the best investment they could gefc. The shares wero fully paid up, and there was no further liability on the Bharea invested in the Company. Witness was questioned relative to tho petition of Henry McLaughlan. Witness said that when the Private Benefit Societies Bill was brought up laab year, there was a meeting of the men, when a resolution was passed praying that the Bill be not passed, and if passed, to exclude the Sugar Company's Society. There was no coercion used to get men to sign tho petition. No man had been dismissed or threatened in the matter of eigning the petition. MeLaughlan was not dismissed on account of his action with regard to the Bill, and there was no coercion used for the men to sign the petition. Ib was only the Provident Fund that was registered in Sydney.

Mr Fisher : If the Provident Fund is registered in New South Wales, what is the objection to registration in New Zealand 1 ■

Witness said ho did nob know the variations in the Friendly Societies Bill of New South Wales and that of New Zealand.

Mr Fishor said there was reason to think that if there was a new Bill it would be different to that of 1896.

Witness further said that in the matter of reducing hands he was sure the Company would retain the beat men in the service, end that preference would not be eiven those who belonged to the Providenb Fund.