FRIENDLY SOCIETY FINANCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9481, 10 April 1894, Page 3

FRIENDLY SOCIETY FINANCE.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— well wisher of the Friendly Society movement should certainly feel indebted to your efforts, at various times, to bring before the public the serious position that many of them occupy financially. I have before me as I write, your issue of 28fch March, 1893, in which you deal with the matter, and show the results of interviews with leading members of various societies, who for the most part express astonishment at the position indicated. Now, sir, without wishing to discredit in any way the statements of these gentlemen, I would like to point out that the information as dealt with in chat article, was supplied to each and every society in Mew Zealand by the various reports of the registrar of Friendly Societies, and by the valuers who made the valuations which were laid on the table of the House of Representatives, 31st August, 1889, showing the position (financially) of each society as at December 31, 1887. The valuations ending the quinquennium, 1892, are, so far, not all published, and it will be an instructive document when it is laid before the House, inasmuch as it will show what efforts have been made by the societies to bring themselves to a position of financial soundness. There is no doubt that some societies have made efforts, which have resulted in a much improved position, some of which is due to increased interest on investments, and less than average sickness, but this does not detract from their willingness to face the position, and so curtail benefits, or increase contributions, as to bring themselves more in accord with actuarial tables. In your subleader of the sth instant you refer to " the most explicit statements (of Mr. Mason), in his annual reports as to inadequate dues for benefits promised," "and nothing has been done to change the position." Well, sir, I must admit that not much has been done, but, where it has been attempted, I think some recognition should be made, if only for the purpose of showing to intending members that there are societies that recognise the responsibility of promising what they can only perform for a limited period, and that unless adequate graduated rates are adopted they must ultimately fail to carry out their contract. It is not my intention to draw invidious distinctions, bnt it is only just to say that the Independent Order of Rechabites have made considerable progress financially during the last quinquennium, while the 1.0.0. F., usually known as the American Order, have since 1877 adopted such rates as have placed them financially at the head of all societies in New Zealand, as successive valuations have shown. Other societies may also have made progress in this direction of which I am unaware, but I fear the bulk of them will be found no nearer financial soundness than before. Now, sir, for this state of affairs there seems to me but one remedy, and although I am not an advocate in a general way for State interference, there are times when it is a solemn duty for the Government of a country to step in and compel remedial measures. Let the Government have actuarial tables prepared (and give the Registrar power to enforce their adoption by Friendiy Societies) of proper adequate grcuhtuted contributions for certain benefits. Of course some allowance would have to be made for the large number of members who have joined under the old rates, as they, in the past, have erred through want of actuarial knowledge, and some gradual step would have to be adopted in their case, but all new entrants should be required to pay the approved scale, and thus in the course of time the various societies would assume a sound position, instead of, with present outlook, drifting each quinquennium to a condition of insolvency, which is only staved off by the admission of young new members. One great cause of the present position is uniform rates of contributions for all ages, which is in some cases as low as Is per member, which system is manifestly rotten from an actuarial standpoint, and even when rates are graduated according to age, the position is not very much improved unless they are ample. ' The average working man, in many cases, does not enquire whether the Society he proposes to join is solvent or not. He simply joins it because it promises for a smaller amount of dues the same, or larger benefits, than is offered by those whose contributions are calculated to meet all requirements, and it appears to me to be the urgent duty of Government to take steps as indicated above, at the earliest possible moment, if Friendly Societies are to continue to do the good work which they have done in the past, by inculcating thrift, and timely assistance to their members when in need of it.

The Friendly Society movement has now arrived at such a stage, mostly unaided by expert knowledge, that it is essential that the 26,000 members in New Zealand should be shown how utterly impossible it is to go on in the present rule of thumb manner, without the near prospect of wrecking their institutions, and bringing great hardships and wide-spread misery on themselves, and contempt upon organisations that have been erected on the most sublime principles, and who for the most part are actuated by the spirit of benevolence and charity. It is possible that the political aspect may be a bar to action on the part of the btate, as 2600 votes are worth considering, but I am confident that every locality has within itself many members who are extremely anxious for financial reform, and would hail with satisfaction any step that would place them on a sound basis,— am, etc., ■ WEIIO-WISHEK.