The Star. FRIDAY, JULY 27, 1888.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4755, 27 July 1883, Page 2

The Star. FRIDAY, JULY 27, 1888.

Wb ere going to Bay a few words to our^ "young friends," as the olergy call them, th»footballen. They psrhapi will not like what we are about to say, and considering the way in whioh they have been praised, flattered, and admired, the plain truth, though wholesome, will not be agreeable. 80 long aa young men choose to form private football clabf, and play together, they need not expect any publio criticism, if they do not wish for public notice. Of course if they wish to see reports of their matches published they cannot object to criticism. But no newspaper would think of reporting or criticising the play or matches of any football club if the members did not wish it ; the general publio as a fact, do not oare one straw about such reports. But when football olubfl assume to themselves the power and functions of selecting a team whioh is to represent the Provincial District of Canterbury, and when this team is ever/whore proclaimed to be the Canterbury team, and when this Canterbury team in six suooeisire years oan never win a single matoh from Otago, and has just been ignominiouelj licked, then we thick it is time either for the Canterbury team and its selector* to retire from the publio gaze for a year or two, . diligently to practice, or for some other selectors to choose some other team. Football is a game which requires a certain combination of physical and mental powers j strength of muicle, good wind, fleetness of foot, are not enough unleis a man has brains too. But surely no one will maintain that for six years it has not been pouible to find fifteen young men in all Canterbury endowed with these qualities, and having mob. a knowledge of the game as to enable them to compete on equal terms with the Otago men P Is the right plan Adopted for choosing the men ? Are social considerations allowed to hare &Dy sway P We ask for information : we do not know that anything of thiß sort occurs ; bnt in a society constituted like that of Canterbury it may do. Is personal favonritism allowed any influence P Does one man get in, although rather shaky, because he hiß pretty sisters P and another man because his mother girc* Buoh jolly dances, you know P Is there, in faot, a rigorous and impartial seleotion of the best men from all parts of the Province P We feel sure of this, that in some way or tther either the wrong men Bre selected or, that if they really are the best men Canterbury oan produce, they do not practise and train as diligently as the Otago mea. The fact is, that too muoh flattery and too little wholesome critioism has characterised newspaper reports of matches. We blame ourselves and our contemporaries, but for the future we hope a muoh -needed reform wQL be elected in tbis department* '

•Thi Sixth Beport issued by the Registrar of Triendly Societies hts just reached us. Statistical reports of this kiid ara of course useful ; bat their value would be infinitely greater if there were some nearer relationship between the date of their issue ansl the period to whioh they refer. The present issue is headed " 1883 ; " but its contents are eighteen months old, for they have reference only to the period ending December, 1881. The extension of some of the Friendly Sooieties has been so rapid since then, that some of the Begistrar's statistical tables are rendered practically useless. Surely the machinery of centralization is elaborate enough and eottly enough to produoe somewhat better results. The report is, notwithstanding, of considerable interest ; and we regard one portion as being of great value. It appears that in two distriots of the Ancient Order of Foresters, Wellington and Kelson, speoial TalnitioDs have been made of the worth of the funds, in order to determine whether or ■ot these branches of the Order were in a solvent condition. In the Wellington distriot tho valuer was Mr Nosworthy, " a valuer appointed by the distriot and approved by the Governor." In the Nelson distriot the work wai undertaken by Messrs Leslie and Black, the Public Valuers. The results are startling ; and it is not at •11 surprising to learn that the announcements and recommendations " seem to have been received with hostility and distrust." Taking the Wellington Distriot by way of illustration, it appears that in a list of fourteen Courts, all save two were— as a matter of fact— insolvent. The adopted formula was this:— By comparison with standard tables, the gross liability of the distriot under its various insurance ontraols was estimated to be £51,787 14* Bd, or £39 7s Id per member. In like manner it was ascertained that "The assets, realised and prospective, amounted together to £41,966 13s 3d, or £34 3s 5d per member, leaving an actuarial deficit of £6,821 Is Si, or £6 3i 8d per member." We have purposely given only the Wellington results : those of the Nelson distriot are very muoh worse. The causes for so deplorable a state of things are easily indicated. The scales of contributions have been ridiculously low, and the investments of funds have been injudiciously made. The remedy is of course obvious. What is the aotuarial position of the ]*riendly Sooieties in this distriot ? If that position is bad, the sooner the truth is known the better. It is infinitely preferable that an unpleasant fact should be faced now, than that— some years hence — there should be bursting bubbles and widespread disaster.