PATRIOTIC FUNDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17428, 25 March 1920, Page 5

PATRIOTIC FUNDS.

SUGGESTION FOR "POOLING."

AUCKLAND* BODY'S ATTITUDE.

OPPOSITION EMPHASISED.

The opposition of the Auckland Patriotic Association to the suggested nationalisation of patriotic funds, was emphasised at yesterday's meeting of the executive of that hody. A protest against the proposal was received from the Dargaville branch, and at a subsequent stage the matter again came up, when, Mr. V. J. Lamer, the association's delegate to the Advisory Board, reported on the discussion which took place thereon at the last meeting of the board in Wellington.-

Mr. Lamer .stated that the only dissentients to nationalisation were the Auckland, Southland, and Taranaki delegates. It transpired that Taranaki was giving votes up to £100 to any soldier who was totally disabled, but the other societies were not doing this. All at the conference except those mentioned thought the funds should be nationalised, so that equal treatment might be given to every man. The view was.expressed thai Auckland, Taranaki, and Southland would be forced to come into a nationalisation

scheme. They said they did not see why disabled men in the Auckland association's district should receive votes of £500 while men in other districts received only £100 or thereabouts. He had suggested that the best way to equalise the funds of the large associations would be to provincialise them. He had also pointed out that, when Auckland had advocated 'equal treatment for all disabled men none of the, other societies had supported the proposal. Mr. H. Horton said that he thought it was necessary that an expression of opinion on this matter should go from the Auckland Association. Most of them were pleased that the people of Auckland had contributed so liberally to the patriotic funds and that Auckland soldiers were treated better than those in other centres. This was no reason, however, why the funds of all societies should be pooled. If people in other centres had not subscribed sufficient money they should be appealed 'to again. Auckland should not be penalised. The Auckland Association should fight the Government and the other associations on this matter. The president's policy had been very sound. If the Government understood there was a strong feeling in Auckland against nationalisation of funds it would not attempt to transfer the money from her*;. It was neces--, sary the Government should know this. Mr. "A. S. Bankart suggested* that the executive should pass a resolution similar to that of the Dargaville branchi. ' a T?he president, Mr. J. H. Gnnson, said the strange thing 'was that, in 1915, the Auckland Association pressed for a national scheme, but found it involved centralisation of funds in Wellington, and they were not going to go cap in hand to an office in Wellington • for funds. He. quite agreed with Mr. Horton that because the Auckland Association's funds were larger than those of the other societies that was *no reason why it should subsidise the.latter.

Mr. Horton moved that the association's delegate to the Advisory Board be instructed that the people of Auckland were entirely opposed to any form of nationalisation of funds; that the Auckland funds had been' subscribed" by the people of Auckland province, and would be required, for the Auckland Association's own use, and were not more than adequate. . The motion was carried.

Mr. E. Phelan expressed the opinion that the right should be reserved to treat all cases on their merits, in the event of smaller societies being' unable to assist the men of their own district.

The president said the National' War Fund Council had about £22,000, and that money should be available for the smaller and poorer districts. As for Mr. Phelan's suggestion the Auckland Association was • following that course. If its policy had been adopted originally by other societies these questions would not have arisen to-day.