The Nelson Evening Mail. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1901 FRIENDLY SOCIETIES & LODGE DOCTORS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLIII, Issue XLIII, 23 September 1909, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1901 FRIENDLY SOCIETIES & LODGE DOCTORS.

A VICTORY WORSE THAN A * DEFEAT. A GREAT deal has been doile in legislation to make friendly societies as safe an investment as possible for members who seek the aid of sick, accident, funeral, and post-mortem assurances by periodical payment of small sums. But if the judgment given by Mr Evans, S.M., yesterday, in the case of Palmer versus the Travellers' Rest Lodge of Oddfellows, M.U., be upheld "in its law and its contentions, the lodge concerned in particular, and friendly societies in general, will have gained a victory that may be worse than a defeat. The position and conditions With regard to friendly societies and their membsra are familiar to all. On the basis of regular payments during good health free medical attendance is furnished at the expense of the common funds of a lodge. For the ueneral convenience, and for economy, a lodge doctor is usually engaged under contracti instead of medical attendance being provided by various doctors who may be called in as occasion arises. The physician who so contracts is supposed to be under obligation to attend lodge patients at their homes under well understood and reasonable conditions, and in equity and law he cannot pick and choose his patients. As between himself and the lodge he is legally responsible for the fulfilment of the obligation he has incurred for due consideration, and lodge members claiming the benefit of medical attendance when sick in return for payments made to the lodge when well naturally look to the lodge to safeguard their right to such attendance, even to the extent of providing another doctor when a lodge doctor is not available. On tho surface interpretation of ths Acts of Parliament and regulations relating to friendly societies, it might appear that this right was unquestionable, and that it might be' enforced through the law courts if necessary. But the Magistrate very lucidly demonstrates in the judgment delivered yesterday that the legal recourse is not by a member against his fellowmembers constituting the lodge, but by the lodge, on behalf of the aggrieved member, against the doctor. That is to say, the lodge's liability has been met, so far as an individual member's claim is concerned, when it has appointed ahd keeps in engagement a medical officer, But, if Mr Evans' judgment be.irrefragable, there does not seem to be any legal machinery whereby an individual member may be assured that the free medical attendance which is his right shall be secured automatically.. In the case of the Travellers' Rest Lodge, the contention of the plaintiff was that, without due and sufficient reason, the lodge doctor refused to attend him during illness, and another doctor had to be engaged and paid, not out of lodge funds, but from the plaintiff's private purse. By this means the plaintiff, presumably a lodge member good on the books or "financial," was deprived of the benefit of an insurance policywhich he had kept paid lip, and that policy thereby became valueless. Obviously, to restore value to the policy and to ths covenant under which it was is-* nue3.it was the duty of the lodge, mor--ally, if not in low, to make sure that theplaintifF was indemnified in Teason, and to seek recovery of funds s> disbursed by suing tho lodge doctor for breach of cohtract. If a friendly society is to continue holding the status of a sol-von-t "a.ncl trnptworthy insurance company the course here indicated must be automatic, inevitable, and not. dependent in the least degree on the. vote of a majority of membors or the decision of a managing committee. In the case under notice, it is clear that the majority af members, or the managing .committee, declined to indemnify their fellow-meni- ; ber, and failed to seek redress from the ' lodge doctor on his behalf for breach of contract. _ Therefore, the insurance po- . [icy implied in the terms and conditions '' if membership fell into default. That '■ s, the clear issue as it affects friendly ' moieties, and if Mr Evans' judgment be • massailable in law the trustworthiness ' >f the societies for insurance purposes so 'ar as "sick benefits" are concerned is eriously impaired. • •••••- Take the position of members of riendly societies in the smaller towns ;nd districts especially, on the presumpion . that a member has no remedy gainst his lodge if the lodge doctor lee.line to attend him and he is comrelied to engage other medical service. Ls a rule there are only two or three esident doctors in a wide, scattered, nd sparsely populated area, and thoy xe.rcise influence socially and in the reitions between man and man. If one r other of them be a lodge doctor, nd refuse to carry out the terms of infract with regard to individual paents, picking and choosing whom he ill and whom he will not attend, it obvious that if the enforcement of the-

aatatet by legal procedure rest t>a the ecision of a majority 6f a- lodge meetijf, or oil the decision of a majority of management committee* instead of utomatically on Breach, the insurance olicy acquired by a member by his ovenant with the lodge ' becomes praoically valueless. On the ether hafluj he Magistrate defines a sound principle n both law arid equity When he aScteea hat members of a lodge cannot sue hemselves under such conditions as «x---sted in the case against th« I'rftVtllMtt' Jest Ifortgft! Hettce .it becomes inumßertt Oli friendly societies to hasten i> provide themselves with some witp"natic machinery whereby the safegliarung of members' privileges will not de)end Jsi the vicissitudes of a majority r-ote in lodge meeting or the views of a nanagement committee. Assuming that Mf BvariV JuiJjfmeht nferpretS «ie la» 48 it stands, and lays lc%ri..n pfß6e'dent, every member of a 'riendly society who considers himself egally entitled to the benefit of free nodical attendance is under a delusion, the doctor may be of the best and the kindest, and the lodgo Way haVb a, pm najority who wjU Instst on thb terms jf the eentraCt .Being fulfilled afad the :6venant . With tha members carried out n its entirety. But till the law, or regulations, provide automatic compulsion )f such fulfilment, or reasonable com-.; lensation for non-fulfilment, contribu»ions to assure sick benefits to members of friendly societies cease to be i "negotiable security." Yesterday's judgment is of the most vital ,isiportince as indicating a. grave fl§w id friendly societies' legislation and mtlleriaJly impairing the val>ie t>f irjendly sockties ib the thrifty.;, fiericf it is urgent that the defect 6xpos.ed should be imended dt the eafliesi possible. moitielit-v