FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AND REGISTRAR MASON.

Evening Star, Issue 9833, 23 October 1895, Page 4

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AND REGISTRAR MASON.

TO THE EDITOR. Sm, —My attention hatf just been called to an article in your issue of the 11th inst. dealing with a recent memo, of the Registrar of Friendly Societies on the subject of financial reform, in which inter alia you express regret “ that some leaders of friendly societies attempt to underrate the office of the Registrar and make that functionary look foolish in the eyes of their follower#.” You honor mo by singling me out as one of those, and also state “ that in my-haste I am apt to be emphatic, and in my leisure repentant.” The last is nob a bad trait in any man’s character. Do you think, sir, editors are supposed to have any large amount of repentant material in their character ? 1 have been, an Oddfellow for more than forty years, and the Order to which I belong have always endeavored to improve their, position. 1 have welcomed the efforts of the Registrar and assisted him in his well-meant endeavors to put these societies on a sound financial basis. Sir, my life is a busy one, and I have not “many idle moments” to spare. Why you should have singled me out as endeavoring to make the Registrar look foolish is more than I can imagine. The only time I ever spoke in condemnation of that gentleman was at the last district meeting, when I interjected that he hauled down his flag most ignominiously. Two years ago the Registrar or the revising barrister declined to register the laws of one of our lodges, and aiter two years’ correspondence, during which every effort was made to show the office that the laws were in perfect accordance with the Friendly Societies Act without avail, we at last intimated that if he did nob register them we would appeal to a judge of the Supreme Court. Then, and not till then, ’could we bring the office to reason. They then very kindly sent us down a law (type-written), and intimated that if we would accept it the laws would be registered at once; that law, “tell it not in Gath,” being the same, word for word, as the one which, two years before, we had asked them to register, and they had dedined to do it. After such an action as this, sir, the office surely deserves the most sincere and heartfelt pity, and I submit no act of mine or of any other person could make the office look so small as this one of their own. About the time you were writing yonr article I was in the Registrar’s office in Wellington with a gentleman who is an authority bn friendly society matters. He read to Registrar Mason the law which was sent to him on July 26, 1893, and the Registrar held in his hand the law they wished us to adopt and forwarded to us quite recently. Mr Mason had to admit they were word for word the very same. I need not pursue the matter further. How this unfortunate circumstance happened is not for me to say. If explanation is needed the office in Wellington alone can do it; but it is not calculated to raise either the Registrar or the revising barrister in tie opinion of those cognisant of the circumstances, or make us lean very heavily on tie opinion of those gentlemen. I think it only right to add that I do not believe it was the Registrar who was to blame in this matter, as it is not his business to revise rules, but the revising barrister. But the Registrar, writing as he was for another, practically suffered for another’s shortcomings.—l am, etc., J. Robin! Dunedin, October 18. [lt is eminently satisfactory to know |on Bro. Robin’s own authority (hat he {tas assisted the Registrar of Friendly Societies in his well-meant efforts to put on a sound financial basis those societies that have'much need of strengthening in that direction, t(hd we hope he will persevere in that coiujse.„ But since he admits frankly that it is not the business of the Registrar to revise rules he can hardly object to the instance being quoted against himself in support 6! our contention that he is “apt to be emphatic” at times. We have too high an opinion of [Bro.' Robin to believe that the remark to whidb we took exception was other than hasty, and he fuankly acknowledges now that itj was misdirected. We like to see the saddle