THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE AND THE FUND.

Otago Witness, Issue 2690, 4 October 1905, Page 31

THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE AND THE FUND.

Friction has arisen between the Brunner Disaster Fund Advisory Board and the Public Trustee with regard to the case of an old man named Parsons, who lost his son in the disaster. Under a misapprehension that the vote of £26 per annum would only be made for two years, Parsons accepted a lump sum of £50, for which he gave a receipt; but the vote has been continued for nine years to others who had a similar claim on the fund. Some time ago the Advisory Board made a recommendation to the Public Trustee regarding the Pavsons case, and at a meeting to-day he wrote declining to give effect thereto. Much indignation was expressed by members, as Parsons is a sober, industrious, and respectable man, who is in need of assistance, and who has not qualified for the old-age pension. The following motion was agreed to unanimously: — "That this board expresses regret that owing to the action of the Public Trustee in disregarding the resolutions of the board, the board is forced to ask the Government to cause inquiry to be made as to the Public Trustee's manner of discharging the duties of his office as far as they apply to the Brunner Disaste- Fund." A further resolution suggests that the inquiry should be conducted by Mr W. G. Kenrick, S.M., and Mr M. Harman (Crown prosecutor). It was stated that the contingency fund, established to meet cases like that of Parsons, was in credit to the amount of £3000, and whilst Parsons only received £50 others had received £230.

WELLINGTON, September 29. In -reference to the telegram regarding the Brunner disaster fund, the Public Trustee states that under the tiust the trustee was to consult the Advisory Board, a West Coast Local Committee, before makmg alterations, aud had power to veto the recommendations of the board. Parents had no assured position on the funds like widows aixl children. Their allowances had to be rendered year by year by the hoard, and could be vetoed by the trustee. There wan never any certainty of renewal of their allowances, and Sirs Parsons and each of th" other parents had in 1896 accepted lump sums- in satisfaction of their claini& upon the fund. Since then, seeing that all allowances had been continued from year to year to others who had not taken a - .u i np sum in substitution, Mrs Parsons wanted to be

back on the fund. To reinstate her woin<2 mean the reinstatement of other persona similarly placed, and in all cases arrears would have to be paid up. The fund must in the first place be conserved for th» widows. He calculated that the fund would bo exhausted by 1915, or three years longer than tho period originally actuan'ally calculated, which result was being obtained by careful management. The contingency fund was not for the purpose contended by the boaid.