COMMERCIAL.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LII, Issue 49, 26 February 1918, Page 5

COMMERCIAL.

DUNED-lN MARKETS. Messrs Bray Bros, (of Dunedin), Ltd. report as follows for the week ending February 23, 19i8 : roultry: ' Fair supplies l have arrived during the past week, and high prices were obtained for well conditioned birds. Ducks are selling remarkably well, and we strongly advise consignments. Fruit: Apricots are practically finished for the season, and' any coming forward are realising high values. Light consignments of peaches are arriving and. meeting with a good enquiry. Dessert pears are wanted. Large quantities during th e week have condemned, being affected with codlin moth, consequently, all clean lines are eagerly competed for and high prices are ruling'. Supplies of cooking apples are limited, and several lots are condemned daily with codlin, with the result that the market is short supplied. The market is over-supplied with cu cumbers, and they are practically unsaleable. Marrows are arriving freely and lising 4s to 5s per sack 1 . Potatoes: Oamaru and Outram consignments ar e selling readily at tion3. Chaff: New season's will' shortly be reaching n-s. Good old chaff is firm at quotations. Oats: The market ha s firmed consid erably during 1 " the past week, and high prices are being offered for A grade Gar tons on trucks country stations. Good feed lines are difficult to o'btain. Values firm. fl?he following prices were realised luring the week. Wheat: unprocurable. Oats, A Gar lons, 4s 4d per bushel f.o.b.s.i. ,• feed G-artons and Sparrows, 4s per bushel ex store. Chaff, primo oaten sheaf, £7 10s per ton ; medium, £5 to £6 per ton, sacks extra. Fat, 25s per cwt Beeswax, Is 9d per lb (scarce). Bran unprocurable. Pollard, unprocurable. Maize, 6s 6d per bushel. Bacon, scarce Is 3d per lb. Cheese, mild and ma tured, 10d to 10j|d per l'b. Eggs, stamped. Is lOd per dozen ; cased, la 9d per dozen. Butter, creamery, bulk Is 5-Jd per lb; creamery, pats, Is 6tl per lb; dairy and separator, Is par lb. Honey, sections, per dozen. Apples, Mobbs Royal, 5s to 5s 6d per case; Cox's Orange, 9s to 10s per case of 381bs; good demand for all varieties. Apricots, dessert, 4£d to sd' per lb; cases, to 3Ad per lb. Peaches, crates, 4£d pei- H>; cases, 3d per lb. Nelson tomatoes, choice rounds, nicely coloured, 7s per case of 241bs. Plums, choice dessert, up to 4Jjd per lb; jam, to 2d per lb. Pears, cookers, 4s 6d per bushel case. American oranges, market bare. Lemons, Adelaide, 50a per double case. Tomatoes, Christchurch firsts, to 4id per lb ; .local" hothouse, ?id per lb. Nelson Bon Cretian pears, 9s per case of 401'bs. Cucumbers, ■Christ-church, market glutted ; local, 4s per dozen. Potatoes', local, 7s per cwt. ; Outram and Oamaru, 6s 6d ! per cwt. Cauliflowers, s, 10s per rlozen-. Cablvatre.*. unsaleable, Is to Is 6d or sack. Poultry, cockerels 9a per pair: hens. 4s to 4s 6d per pair-, turkey gobblers. • per lb live weiVht-; turkey hew. 9£rt per lb live weiebt■: geese, 8s to 9s per pair; ducks 7s 6d per pair.

financial aid MINISTER'S REPLY. TO SECOND DIVISION LEAGUE. WILLING TO GIVE GUARANTEES. REASON FOR REVISING GRANTS. Following is the full text of a letter sent by Sir James Allan (Minister of Defence) yesterday to Mr R. A. Armstrong (President o.f the Second Division League) in reply to representations made to the Minister regarding the administration of the Soldiers' Special Financial Assistance Regulations by a deputation from the League on Thursday : GRANTS ALREADY TOTAL £160,000 ANNUALLY. 2nd Feb., IQIB. Dear Sir, —The several cases which the deputation from the executive of the Second Division League placed before me yesterday in connection with the administration of the Soldiers' Financial Assistance Board have been investigated ,and I now desire not only to place the board's explanation before the public, but to reply more fully than was possible when you waited on me to the general representations then made. It has been said that the financial assistance regulations have been drawn up with the idea of bluff and to enable the Government to shirk its responsibilities to the dependents of our soldiers, but the public will be able to judge the worth of that statement when they read the last report of the Financial Assistance Board upon the extent of assistance already given. The report, which is dated 4th February, 1918, states: — "The board met on twenty occasions during the month of January, and dealt with 800 applications, including 86 reconsidered cases. Of this number 397 were withdrawn or declined, 27 were deferred for further information from the applicants, and 376 grants were made. Seven hundred applications were received during tho month, and all were submitted to the board with the exception of those not properly filled in by the applicants The board has held 198 meetings _ to date, and has considered 7486 applications. This number includes 963 reconsidered cases, the actual number of new cases submitted being 6523. Grants have been approved of in 302 cases during the month, representing na annual expenditure of £7074 3s 2d. including' 24 additional grants amounting to £314 3s 9d annually, or a gross total to date of 4256 cases, at an annual expenditure Df £7074 3® lOd." "DOES NOT BEAR SEMBLANCE OF ELUFF. Of the cases riow under action, 365 grants have been approved and are awaiting final decision. These, when authorised, as they will be within tho course of _the next few days, will swell the £141,355 total assistance already given to over £160,0G0. Fresh applications are being dealt with every day. Considering that no draft of the Second Division will go into camp until tho end of May next the total assistance already given may eafely be said to be no small sum, and certainly does _ not bear the semblance of "bluff.' Fair-minded critics will appreciate this the more so when they realise that this represents special assistance granted over and above pay and separation allowances and the saving to each household affected of the cost of the man's keep. It will be noted that many cases have been reconsidered, but your executive should clearly understand that in the majority of these cases the reconsideration is the result of change of circumstances requiring an entirely fresh grant. In most of the other cases the amended grant ha<i been made because further enquiry has shown that the whole of the circumstances, of the applicant were not clearly set forth in tho original application. ' INTENTION OF THE REGULATIONS. Most of the dissatisfaction that exists I find upon enquiry of the Financial Assistance Board, is largely due to a misunderstanding of tho -intention of the regulations. Many pdgple appear to be under the impression that they can receive payment in full for any item provided under the regulations irrespective of their financial circumstances. As a matter of fact the intention in all cases is to prevent undue hardship to the soldier and his dependents hy reason of his service in the New Zealand F.Xpeditionary Force, and the board is not called on to make a grant where the income of the soldier and his dependents while he is on service is suflr cient to provide a reasonable amount for the maintenance of the dependents. There seem to be quite mistaken idea amroad that so long as the amounts' applied for do not exceed £156 per annum, Ithq maximum amount payable under the regulations, the board will undertake the whole liability. . If such a policv were adopted it is obvious that glaring anomalies would be created, as the board would bo granting assistance to remove undue hardship which did not exist, owing to the soldier or his dependents being in ' possession of private means which are bringing in asubstantial income. The State indeed, cannot afford to help in such cases and the Government does not propose to do so.

INCREASED COST OF LIVING CONSIDERED. The board has now been in existence for nearly twelve months, and it assures ma that for some time past it has taken into consideration the increased cost of living, and in a good many cases grants that would have removed undue hardships twelve _ months ago have now been increased in spite of tiie fact that the income of the dependents alone might exceed the jtotal _ civil earnings of the soldier before enlistment. Needless to say, the board takes no steps whatever to publish particulars of grants as evidence of the treatment it extends to applicants, but' a few cases taken at random will indicate the liberal manner in which the board has endeavoured to interpret the regulations. In some of these cases it will be seen that the board has ignored the civil income of the soldier before enlistment, and has granted the wife an adequate amount to enable her to mamtainher self and children m comfort during the soldier's absence, in spite of the fact that the military income of the wire alone plus the board V grant now exceeds the total civil' earnings of ner husband, out of which the latter had to be clothed and fed • now the State provides his food and clotning. ATTITUDE ON NEW INSURANCE POLICIES. The question of the board's attitude in the matter of new insurance policies has been given considerable prominence, and notwithstanding various announcemets that have been made throughout New Zealand and the definite statement made in mv recent letter to your league, there still seems to be misapprehension as to whether a reservist is entitled t.o assistance to meet insurance premiums and' war loading on a new policy.

[ I wish again definitely! to state that | the board's policy in respect to hew life inn ranee policies is as follows: "In the case 'of new life or longterm (30 years or over) endowment policies up, to £2OO only, the board 1 is prepared to consider payment of the ordinary premiums and the war loading, where there is no existing policy, and where th e circumstances warrant a grant of financial assistance." The board, however, cannot, take out the policy, but it can be taken for granted that the board will pay the premium and any war loading if the soldier has no other insurance, and is unable to, meet the premiums out of his military pay and allowances and 1 other incomes, if any. I have no hesitation in giving this undertaking, because I am advised that the Soldiers' Financial Assistance Board has already agreed to pay the premiums and war loading on a very considerable number of new policies. It is estimated- that grants have been made to meet premiums on new policies to the number of over 200. It is not possible to give the exact- number without searching each file in the office. Regarding the letter quoted l by you yesterday, and to which you apparently attached great importance as. indicating that the board's practice was at variance with th e policy just outlined', I find on investigation that it was seiat out in error and should be in no. way regarded as an expression of the board's policy. So far as the boardis aware, it is an isolated instance .|u.>d ! arose from the case in question being bandied by a new clerk in the office. The letter was unfortunately, sent to the addressee without the being noticed. . If the latter had wTittgn to the board asking for an explanation they matter would have at once been put right. I desire further to say that if it should happen that a similar intimation has been sent out to any other applicant this also must have' been in error and he should' at once communicate with the board. NECESSITY FOB, REVIEWING 1917 GRANTS. Your deputation passed a good deal of criticism on the action of the Finan- [ cial Assistance Board in reviewing 1917 j grants owing to the introduction of the increased separation allowances. I [ am informed by the board that this ' is being done bnlyi in cases where it is | found that an anomaly has arisen takingl the whole circumstances, including' i the soldier's pre-service income, into consideration. The board- was obliged to review these cases because with thes e grants existing it could not reconcile decisions in recent cases of men in exactly the same financial position. Tak e f° r instance' the cases of Private Smith, who has been already serving, and of Private Jones, who has just entered camp. Both, before joini- | incr the Expeditionary Force, wer 6 in a corresponding financial position. Private Smith was granted financial assistance under the old allowances. By the introduction of the new separation allowances hp, and his dependents' are thereby placed in a better position; than, they were in before Private Smith joined the Expeditionary Force. In the case of Private Jones-, the same grant cannot be given because the board must consider his military income at the 1913 ratei and grant sucli assistance as is felt necessary in addition ; whereas, in Smith's case, the military income was considered ait the lower "(1917) rate and augmented by a larger grant. It will be seen tnen that the former would have cause for complaint because of the better treatment extended' by the board to Private Smith. The' board, as a result, is obliged' to review the case of Private Smith, the principle upon which it acts being that it cannot fairly diifr ferentiate between the two. These arte the sort of cases that aTe being revised, and I am informed that in. no case has the reduction made been equal to the increased separation allowances. In fact, a substantial port-ion' of thft original grant in many- cases, has 'been allowed -to stand in view of fehe increased' cost of livintr. I ain irlad to "have the opportunity of explaining this, because misconception has arisen. DEFINITE EXAMPLES QUOTED." With, a view to quoting ml re definite examples of what has been done, f. have taken a number of cases at ran dom that hav e been reviewed. Gase ' 1 (wife only)..—Soldier's Preiser vice income of £165, paying £26 rent. Wife's military income, 1917 rates (oa- 6d allotment, Is separation allowance),* £B2 2s 6d per annum; board granted full payment of rent, £26. Wife's I'9lß military income (3s 6d allotment, 3s separation allowance) £llß 12s 6d; board rescinded rent .grant of £26, leaving the wife (after payment by herself of rent) , £92 12s 6>d per annum for herself alone to live upon. In addition, soldier himself is receiving Is 6d per day pocket money. This gives combined monetary receipts of £146, plus soldier's free keep, or only £l7 less than soldier's pre-service income.

-Case 2 (wife only).—Soldier's preservice income, £136. Wife's total military income, 1917 Tat-es, £B2 2s bcf; wife's private income from propetty, etc.,. more than sufficient to meet, recurring finatwial ol(ligations; 'board granted liT e insurance, £ls 14s. 9(3. Wife's 1918 military ancome, £llß 12s 6d; "board rescinded grant, leaving wif© not iriiillary income of £lO2 17s 3d', plus privatg, income, making a net total of £132 i2a 6d. Wife lives rent free on farm. . . Case 3 (wife and three children). — Soldier's pre-service income £166. Wife's 1917 military income,- £123 3s 9d; board granted for interest, Tates, and fire insurance £l9 7s Id. Wife's 1918 military iocom®, £173 7s 6d; board rescinded' 1917. grant, leaving her, afiter payment of interest, ratep, and! insurance, £154 Gs . sd, witlju man to keep. .In addition', soldier drawing Is 6d a day, makicig combined income £2OO 15s, pi * free keep and 1 pension benefits. ,■ Now these are merely takeft at random, and may iiot perhaps'-' be -Q fair guide, but if regarded as necessary I am .quite willing to make <a more exhaustive investigation. ,= I attach 1 he;re to schedules (a) prison ting Ihe board's side in reply £o the specific cases quoted hv the deputation; and (b) taken at random, to show recent urtints made by the hoard. It will be noticed- that the net income varies iu certain cases. Although this may appear to be an anomalv., it is quite unavoidable by reason.'of the-, fact that the board cannot pay a portion only of such obligations as interest, rates, life insurance p. jinium3, etc. Consequently, by authorising the payment of the full amount of certain obligations, one applicant may b e left w'tii. a net income of *a few pounds more than another apulicant, j am not yet in a -position to reply to the representation* of the deputation regarding home service allowances in .reppect of the specific cases quoted. These are heir.2 investicrated, and I will advise you of the result io due course.

"PREPARED 1 TO GIVE EVERT POSSIBLE GAURANTEE." In conclusion, let m e repeat tliat I welcome the fullest discussion of the administration of the Financial Assistance Board. I do so for two reasons —firstly, because I am satisfied th&t. the board' has honestly tried to giv» effect to the spirit of the regulations which have been framed solely to meet the needs of soldiers and their dependents; and secondly, because if, irt t>he investigation, it is found that ahy case has not Wn adequately met, vfQ shall 'be able to increase the grant forthwith. It is not my desire, ndr is it the desire of the National Government, that the financial assistance • regulations should lie administered in. a niggardly spirit, iuid I am sura that my colleagues "with me are prepafetJ •to give every possible guarantee, that this principle will b e fully carried' out, 'Our desiro, equally with that of ■ your league, is tn see that full justice, is <1 r>i?jto soldiers and' their dependents. We, nevertheless, have a difficult task to perform, and it would be> strange indeed if we performed it without arousing some cause for complaint. But let i<t be clearly understood that anyone dissatisfied with the financial assistance given may <it aoy time apply for a rehearing, nmi I guarantee that their cases wi;\ receive ..the consideration ihev deserve.-—Yours faith full}'', (Sgd.) J .AMES ALLEN, Minister of Defence.