Art Union Raids an New Zealand

NZ Truth, Issue 1017, 23 May 1925, Page 1

Art Union Raids an New Zealand

Premium on Dishonesty The Wasteful Management and the Plain Thief One for the T. B. Soldiers, Six For the Artists I—Why1 — Why Should Our Cash be Exported or Stolen ? The Australian system of: conducting art unions, and of' scattering books of tickets m New Zealand, makes it- probable that New Zealand money will only minutely benefit the beneficiaries/in Australia (if, indeed, the New, Zealand money ever gets there). As there is no proper check on the returning of ticket butts, there is every temptation 'to New Zealand ticket-sellers to misappropriate the money they collect. So New Zealand money has to run the gauntlet of collectors' thefts and Australian wastes (the latter are enormous). • On economic as well as on moral grounds, this New Zealand money. that is now stolen, or subverted, or at any rate diverted, should be retained m New Zealand. In what way is a properly-conducted New Zealand art union worse than a dishonest .Australian art union that has strayed out of bounds? The remedy is' more high-standard art unions m this • country; or Post Office restrictions on art, union money sent out of New Zealand; or a prohibition of sale of tickets m any art union not authorised by the New Zealand Government. • Perhaps the remedy is a combination of all these several courses. -

Australian promoters of Australian art unions have adopted. the practice of sending books of tickets to persons in -New Zealand— persons with whom they have no acquaintance. In many cases the persons to whom the tickets are sent seem to be selected haphazard. Thpse showers of ' Australian art union tickets fall like the rain— they, fall alike on < the, just and.the unjust. , ■ ' Even if the Australian art union is "run square" (which: often is riot the case), and even if the New Zealand selling agent "runs square,'' the practice is still open to grave objection, because it means a systematic raiding of New Zealand pockets m, order to feed Australian "charities." , ■ Australian Scandals. If the New Zealand Government takes no objection, on moral gx'ounds, to these Australian charity lotteries, then it should equally take.no, objection- to New Zealand public-purpose lotteries; the Government should organise, or permit to b_a organised, more New Zealand art unions for New Zealand charitable objects. Other things being equal, the money should be kept m the country. [ \ But other things are not equal, because, while New Zealand art unions are so few and so well supervised that the prescribed purpose generally receives- its due, m Australia it is fre - quently . not so. An Australian art union sometimes turns over! thousands of pounds and then returns to the charitable object (hospital or sucb| like) hundredg o f pence. . : And even worse performances than that; are oh record m New South Wales. •Prom 1920 to -1923 the, list of unproductive j art unions (amounting almost to steals) m Australia . was appalling. The figures were the severest indictment of private dishonesty and public; immorality (public immorality m, ; that the thing was tolerated) . v At »last the Government 'of New South Wales was forced into legislative ac-. tioh. V.cry late m the day it induced Parliament to y pass ; Act to the

effect that "the whole of the net proceeds, and not less than 40 per cent, of the gross proceeds of. art unions shall be devoted to the benefit m aid' of which the art union is promoted." But. results are still coming- to hand of art unions that were launched before this legislation was passed, and which ; presumably are not affected by its provisions. ■■• v "}.'''- For instance, the Sydney press a few weeks ago announced that the T.B. Sailors' and j-Soldiers' Art Union resulted , m the beneficiaries receiving less than twopence m every shilling collected. The rest drained away to canvassers, business people, officials,; and prizes. . - Of the £7281 15s 8d that the public contributed (as it thought) to T.B. sailors and soldiers, roughly oneseventh, may reach the legitimate beneficiaries, and this includes £110 7s received from the. sale :' of unclaimed prizes. ' Openings for Theft. Shall New Zealand money be sent out of the country ; for results as bad as that ?— and Sometimes worse! -„ Even now the worst has not been told. Resides wasteful conduct of art unions, there ns straight-out stealing. It is recorded, m connection with this T.B. Soldiers' and Sailors' Art Union,' that "some, of the ticketholders were so dishonest as to cori- ■ vert. ' : to their own use cash to the amount, of £1.45 95." (Of which, the Committee recovered «ei3!) ■■".-. If ticket-holders m Australia can rob the art unions — and clearly they do—^what about the ticket-holders 1 selected' *at random, m New Zealand, as mentioned m the opening of this i article", ' ' ; ' V- - ■• . ,*»• , : ■■ ' : H, •' ■ •' ' : \-\. Without warning, or warrant,, a man m New Zealand receives from the promoter of ,, an Australian art union (or from someone connected with it)

books of tickets. He is thus encouraged to raid the pockets of New Zealanders for -Australian 'purposes (which is economically-wrong), and he is tempted to appropriate the proceeds of ■ his sales (which is a fraud on everybody concerned). That there is a flagrant temptatidn to theft is proved by the fact that though he may be' asked by his Australian supplier to return the b,utts of tickets,' there is no power to. compel him , to I do "so, and no check' on -vyhether or not he v sells tickets and himself retains the cash and the butts. Some New Zealand" recipients of books of tickets (unasked by them) have simply retained, them. Those tickets have passed right out of the, orbit of the art union (presuming, of course, that ;no ticket,. goes, into the'- lottery unless it is' represented by cash and butt). But .there is no safeguard against sales unaccounted for. . Either the. New Zealand Government should do something— through the . Post Office : or ptherwise-^to stop Australian' art unions, operating \where New Zealand art unions are prohibited,

or else the New Zealand Government should authorise a sufficient number of high-standard and guaranteed New ! Zealand, art unions \ to mop up this speculative cash now magnetised from New Zealand to Australia (or, worse still, diverted into the pockets, of .people who live on the art union game .or who are plain thieves). Another anomaly is this: Not onlymay New Zealanders not promote art unions unauthorised by the New Zealand Government. Newspapers m this Dominion must also not advertise them.. (Yet v Australian newspapers .may circulate m .New Zealand con- :. raining advertisements of, art' unions that New /Zealand newspapers must n ot advertise; Are the restrictions on lartVunion prompting and advertising intended to be solely directed against the native-born,?, Is their intention to- make New Zealand a preserve for the Australian raider and the' defaulting, collector ? If riot, will the Government take action to •'. tighten the restrictions m the Post Office," and to open the door 'wider to approved New Zealand art unions? ; -