REQUEST OR DEMAND?

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 25, 30 January 1923, Page 8

REQUEST OR DEMAND?

NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE

CIBCULAR.

The action of.the Standing Committee of the New Zealand Institute in serfding out a circular last year appealing for funds came in for some comment at the annual meeting "of the institute to-day.

Mr. Wright (Canterbury) said his institute for the sum ofr £1 Is yearly undertook to supply their members with certainprivilegea, including a volume of transactions for the year. Without con-, suiting them or giving them an opportunity to, do anything, the Standing Committee wrote to their members directly with a virtual demand for a sum of 10s, making it appear to members that the contribution was raised to £1 lls.S,,The Canterbury Institute resented the Nevr Zealand Institute going over their heads.

Dr. Cockayne, a member of the Standing Committee, said the matter of finance had been one .of extreme urgency; and had they waited to write to all local bodies they would never, have got any money. Those who were, written to were members of the New Zealand Institute, and they had a perfect right to circularise them and ask for contributions. The committee had no intention ',;of slighting .any incorporated body. ". ■ '■ ■

The Hon. G. M. Thomson (Otago) said the letter merely asked for- -contributions, which were made accordingly. A member: "It was not a demand at all." " •' Mr. Thomson: '.'lt was simply a request." .

On inquiry from members the treasurer (Mr. M. A. Elliott) said 210 members contributed £188. There were 1351 members.

The opinion was expressed by Dr. Chilton (Canterbury) that further discussion would do no good. However, he said, the power of the institute depended on the local institutes and societies,. and nothing should, be done to' weaken local membership. If the circular had not been a demand it had been . very. nearly one.

The president:. "The point is that we still- require money." (Laughter.)