BEQUESTS TO CHILDREN.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 10573, 30 September 1910, Page 1

BEQUESTS TO CHILDREN.

UNIQUE LEGISLATIVE" PROPOSAL. By Telegraph. (From Our Own Correspondent.) Wellington. September 20. The Inalienable Lii'e Annuities Bill came lip for its second reading in the Legislative Council to-day and the At-tornev-General explained it at some length. I)r Findlay said that the measure, for the first time in British jurisdiction, would give an opportunity for the father to provide for a son or daughter in' such a way that the provision would not be wasted either by thoughtlessness or viciousuess. The state ol the existing law prevented many fathers from making such provision. To leave, a young man or woman a sum oi £200!). and place it in their hands in ,i lump sum meant temptation io the annuitants to waste and to other people to help them, but if a warrant was' pavable to create an annuity that could not be charged, assigned, or alieti-

au'd in iinv wav. it would be a very great help 'indeed to these who _\vi-hed to provide for the rising genera! inn. The' Hill limitvd the auuuilv to f2 a week, and provided lhat it could no; be anticipated or dealt _ with in _any possible wav or converted into cash. '! he 1 Sill would' meet the case of indigent gentlewomen and children mentally or phesicallv deficient. The annuities could be obtained by either a lump sum pavment or by the annual payment ei small instalments. For instance, the anmiitv of CKfl a year could be obtained for a very small sum if the payments were spread over 3D years. 'I he re was also a provision for the conversion of unencumbered life insurance policies into annuities. The annuities wool: be protected against bankruptcy and creditors of all kinds. The wisdom ol preventing the alienation has already been seen in regard to the old-age pension system. Dr Vindhiv added that in framing the Hill lie had had valuable assistance from Mr Justice Chapman, to whom he wished to tender his thanks. "Whv do von limit the annuities to 02 a week:-" asked the Hon. H. F. Wigram. Or Fiudlav replied that that was done because considerable protection was given in bankruptcy, partioularjy to wTves and children, and the government desired to prevent a man from creating a large annuity in fraud of bis creditors. The Hon. E. C. J. Stevens (Canterbury) expressed the belief that the Bill was the most important one of a minor character which had ever been introduced. TTo suggested that it would be well to provide that the new system should be managed entirely by the Government Life Insurance Office. .1 lie limit of £2 a week, however, was too °Tlie Hon'. 0. Samuel (Taranaki) urged the Council to pause before giving a monopoly in the business even to the State. 'He could not see much objection to the proposed limitation and believed that the purpose of the Hill would be very generally sympathised with. He suggested that the annuities be procurable m the name elmore than one person, with a provision for payment on the longest lite. The Attorney-General, in reply, said that he would submit Mr Stevens suggestion to the Cabinet, although he hesitated to express an opinion on it. He believed that if the Government Office had a monopoly its business would soon be doubled. The second reading was agreed to on the voices and the Bill was referred to the Statues Revision Committee.