STATE FIRE INSURANCE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXII, Issue 168, 29 July 1901, Page 2

STATE FIRE INSURANCE.

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—ln reading F. J. Foster's letter in Wednesday's issue, re State fire insurance, I way surprised at the cool manner in which he designated "Trader"' a heathen, and himself a Christian, and lover of justice!

Is it Christianity to call honest, hard-working people who invest their savings in encouraging local industry "robbers?" Where is the "justice" in this ca«e, which is one in thousands? My father came to this country at the age of 23, settling on a few acres of bush land, which he cleared and cultivated to form a home, between times gumdigging, navvying, bullock-punching, etc., to keep a stock of flour in the house, which was difficult to get and very dear. When his family of six wore old enough, he had to sell out and come nearer to civilisation to educate them. Two years ago he died in hai--ness, aged 63, leaving mother, who was two months younger than himself, with eighteen hundred pounds — forty years' savings* —invested in three New Zealand fire insurance companies, which were made paying concerns by hard work and energy, which the Government propose to annex without compensation, leaving mother, who prides herself on not being a burden to anyone, penniless. Please clearly define the justice and Christianity, chapter and verse? Also, whose chest did father sit on? Whom did he rob? Whose chest is mother at present sitting on, and who is she robbing? I may add, one company suspended payments for 'some considerable lime. I am only a labourer, certainly, but I believe if the. State had control of production and distribution a better state of things would exist than at present; but it must be done.in a just manner, and T fail to isee how taking over one industry and allowing the rest to stand will attain that object On tho other hand, if we had to wait for the Government to start an industry, we would never get it And is it fair for that body to wait till a combination of thrifty citizens prove an industry payable and then annex it?

I spend my small savings in company shares, which are made accessible to the public by the time payment system Half a crown on application, half a. crown on allotment, and calls of not more than 2/0 per month or so The last purchase was in the Glass Company, just starting, which hals given work to a lot of men so far, and will continue to do if it proves a success Now, if this reduces the price of glassware, gives employment, and pays good dividends, whose chest will I be sitting on? Who will I be robbing? Why did the Government not develop this industry before it was set going by the public? Why don't they develop other industries which are non-existent in New Zealand, and not borrow money to crush existing ones If they did so they might work round to Foster's views without causing distress

I also fail to see any Christianity in throwing 2000 fire insurance employees on the labour market^ plus their families, which, at a very low estimate, means 5000 bouls; a.ml I am nearly certain their salaries don't average £200 per annum I think Foster's Christianity partakes of that practised by the pirate bird—watches till it sees another bird catch a fish and then pounces on it,—l

am, etc.,

LABOURER.

(To the Editor.)

Si rr _ln reply to the statement that this measure is an unjust interference with private enterprise, I would ask since when did public enterprise become subservient to private enterprise? You must know that private enterprise never invested a sixpence without making itself reasonably sure that the public would return it with 100 per cent, profit, and who is to provide that profit but the toiler, by whose exploitation all private enterprise flourishes. And our Premier noting this fact, and also that the Government have done well by taking their own risks with regard to public buildings, has very properly brought in thia Bill to relieve the people whom he represents from the tentacles of the Insurance Trust.

You say: "In dealing with the State Fire Insurance Bill, we have to consider first of all whether there is a. legitimate call for State interference in this particular direction." That there is urgent necessity for immediate action similar to that taken by the Premier I should have thought was patent to even the most ignorant. It is a well-known fact that insurance companies will not take risks unless the local governing bodies, first of all, reduce the risks to a minimum by establishing fire brigades, and the necessary machinery for extinguishing fires, etc., and' it iH only when this has been done that fire insurance companies step in and take the profits. It is by taxing the public for fire protection that thte private insurance companies make their money.

Another call for State interference is very manifest in the fact that the existing offices have formed a trust to Btop competition among themselves, to the disadvantage of tie people. Now, |rir, such a thing as a general law to prohibit trusts is a farce. General lawß to prohibit 'trusts are being enacted in every State in America, but they are as futile to stop trusts as they ' are to stop the noon-day's sun. There is but one way to overcome the evils of trusts, and that is to out-Herod nerod by establishing the "Great Trust" composed of the whole people, and in this particular instance by establishing the State Fire Insurance Company of the Colony of New Zealand. In trusts comprised of private persons all the profits go to those inside the trust, and in the great trust of Government ownership all th)e profits are distributed amongst the general public, and in this case part of the revenue is applied to the establishment or fire brigades, ete^ and I venture to assert that the rates charged by Government under this insurance scheme will not exceed 30 per cent, of the rates charged by private companies. In proof of this I will simply quote the Government Accident Insurance rates.

In quoting clause 4, and remarks thereto, you are unfairly criticising that portion of the Bill, because clause 4 is simply declaring as law that which private companies are doing at.

the present time —in fact, private companies are at present to my knowledge striking properties off their lists altogether, and in Waihi, to my knowledge, in some cases it is absolutely impossible to get insurance at all. In conclusion, I would ask, has not the State the same moral right to institute its own insurance as its own mail service, or telephone service, or school system? And if the service, why leave out the insurance State has to provide a fire protection portion of it for the benefit of private greed?—l am, etc.,

A. Y. ROSS.

General Commission Agent, Waihi.