THE MACARTHY BEQUEST.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1569, 12 October 1912, Page 6

THE MACARTHY BEQUEST.

BOARD OF TRUSTEES. ITS CONSTITUTION CRITICISED. Tlio llohso went into Committee on the Thomas George Macarthy Trust Bill.

' The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN (Minister for Justice) explained that tho certificate by a Supreme Court Judge required by the Legislature Act had been obtained, and the Bill could now legally proceed. In reply to Sir Joseph Ward, tho Minister said that he was confident that there was no danger in the proposal to empower tho trustees to administer other charitable or educational bequests. Sir JOSEPH WARD (Awarua) said tho principle involved was a very important one, and ho thought the operation of the power should be restricted to the Wellington province. The PRIME MINISTER said there was not the slightest intention to allow the powers in question to interfere with tho proper administration of tho Macarthy Trust. It was thought that something similar to the King's Trust in London should be started in New Zealand, that would grow with the increasing importance of tho Dominion.

Sir JOSEPH WARD insisted that there was a great deal to be said against tho application of a Private Estate Bill to the whole Dominion. Other trusts might ask for similar powers. Mr. H. M'CALLTIM (Wairau) predicted that the powers would have to be revoked. The effect of allowing the Macarthy Trust to administer several trusts would be to glorify and magnify the namo of Thomas George Macarthy in a way that was never intended. The Prime Minister: A'good thing, too.

Mr. irCnllum said the name of Jracnrthy was. to lake the place of -that of Kins Edward .VII. ■ The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN expressed snrpriso at the tono adopted by the lost speaker. The trust was constituted of the holders of high and responsible positions, who must administer any trust faithfully and well in strict accord with the tern\s of the bequest.

Mr. T. M. WILFORD (Hutt) agreed with Mr. Hcrdmnn that the clause under review could not materially affect the business of the Public Trust. He commended the establishment of a board to receive other bequests. General Legislation Advocated. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) objected to tho establishment of the board on the lines proposed. The Prime Minister might, find himself called upon to administer some specific trust and to control •and manage a boys' high school or an orphanage. The establishment of tho board brought in an entirely new principle, and .was a distinct departure from the will of the testator. lie suggested that tho clause .should be withdrawn in the meamtime, and legislation introduced next year to deal with this and other large trusts which existed in tho Dominion. He objected to the conversion, of a purely advisory board into an administrative board.

The PRIME MINISTER said that there was not much in the objection. The board was an administrative as well as a controlling and advisory body. Hβ thought that one of the. best effects of Clause 10 would be to perpetuate the memory of a man who wm a benefactor in the best senso of the word.

Mr. A. .11. MYERS (Auckland East) supported the clause, and expressed a hopo that it would bo placed on the Statute Boole.

Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) also disagreed with Sir Joseph Ward and Mr. Russell. Ho saw no harm in glorifying the memory of a man like Mr. Macarthy. He would place such a man on a pedestal. Thero w;is no fear of exaggerating appreciation of the gift that Mr. Mac-, nrfhy had made. Sir Joseph WARD said that Mr. Macartby J s bequest wiis one of the finest things that had ever been done. But he did not think that Mr. Macarthy had over contemplated that his trustees should undertake tho management of! other estates. Tf there' was to bo a system of this kind, it should bo established by distinct legislation giving anyono power to appoint general trustees under a general law. Other testators who might follow Mr. Macarthy would have ft right to have their names perpetuated, but under this Bill the nnnios of these men would bo annihilated. ITo did not beliovo that tho trustees under this Bill had tho time, to administer half-a-dozen other estate?. Difficulties Foretold. ' Mr. K. M'CAT/MJM said that ho did not wish to see Mr. Macarthy put. in tho samo position as tho late King Edward. His reason was that other benefactors as generous and as deserving as Mr. Macarthy might come along in tho future. The Bill set up a board in opposition to the Public Trustee. The Minister would find himself in a difficulty if he allowed tho Bill to pass as it stood.

Mr. W. H. BFAJi (Wellington Suburbs) said that the Bill did not go so far as some of its critics thought. All that the Bill did was to provide machinery which could have been put into the will had tho necessity for it been forsoen. All that Clause 10 did was to enable any future testator to obtain the benefit of the machinery provided in the Bill if he so desired.

Mr. E. P. LEE (Oamaru) Raid Hint ho agreed with (he member for Awnrua, an<l disliked the Bill ns it stood. The board as constituted was not n suitable ono ti* administer trusts' in general. It would be best to withdraw Clause 10, and bring in a general Bill to deal generally with, charitable and educational bequests. Ho doubted whether the late Mr. Mocarthy had desired that his trust should bo mixed up with the general trust matters of the Dominion. More Opposition. The short title was passed on the voice* Tho clauses down to Clause l> were approved without di.'cussion, but. when Clause in was reached Sir Joseph AVnril announced .that he would call for a division.

Th« Hnn. A. 1,. HEUmiAX acsin defended the .coateiiduu; .that it

would set up a safe, sure body that wonld endure fer all time, for tho ndministr.-i----tiou of charitable and educational bequests. This would serve as an incentive to other people to make in future such bequests as had been made by Mr. Macartliy.

The PRIME MINISTER said that it was truo that tho time of the members of the board was already very fully occupied, but they had power to call other persons to their assistance, and had already done so.

Mr. L. M. ISITT (Christehurch North) said that a board of this nature should be elected upon a broader nnd less tectional basis than w.ns proposed, no would vote for the amendment.

Mr. T. W. RHODES (Thames) eaid thnt it did not seem to him to matter much whether the clauso remained in fho Bill or not. The clause was in ,no senso mandatory, hut simply provided machinery. "He would support tho clause. In answer to Mr. M'Calhun, the Minister said that tho judge who certified the clause was Mr. Justice Chapman. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said that the House would be acting gracefully if it adhered closely to tho text of the late Mr. McCarthy's will. Mr. J. A. YOUNG (Waikato) intimated that ho would vote against this clauso. The Bill should carry out tho terms of the will and nothing else. This was tho wrong place to widen the powers of the Board of Trustees. If a general board were set up its constitution would not be that of the board proposed in this Bill. Tho Approving Majority. Tho Hon. A. L. HERDMAN raised a tumult of objections from all ports of tho House by declaring that those members who opposed the clause considered tho Governor, the Prime Minister, and other members unfit to act as a Board of Trustees. "That is the way to put it," insisted the Minister, smiling at the members who wero loudly expressing dissent. After some further discussion, a division was takvn, nnd tho clause was retained by 31 votes to 29. Following is tho division list:— Ayes (34): Allen Hunter Anderson Mander Bell, Massey Bollard, J. Myers Bollard, E. F. Newman, A. K. Buchanan Nosworthy Buick Pearce Clark Poma.ro Coatea Rhodes, R. H. Dickson' • Rhodes, T. W. Fisher Scott Fraser Smith, F. H. Guinness Statham Guthrie Sykes Herdman Veitch Herries Wilford Hindmarsh Wilkinson Noes (29): Atmore Macdonald Brown Ngata Buddo Okcy. Buxton Poland Colyin liangihiroa Craigie Robertson Davey Russell Escott . Seddon Forbe3 Sidcy Glover Smith, R. W. Hanan Thomson, G. M. Harris Ward , Isitt ' Witty ■ Lee Young M'Callum WIDOWS' PENSIONS, • DEFINITION OF INCOME. The Widows' Pensions Amendment Bill (tho Hon. F. M. B. Fisher) was committed. Clause 2 was amended at the suggestion of Mr. T. H. Davey. As dratted, it provided that an inmate of a mental hospital might be certified incurably insane (in order to confer pension benefits on his wife) by one qualified medical practitioner. This was. amended to provide that the necessary certificate should be given by two medical practitioners or the medical superintendent of tho mental hospital in which a patient is confined. Jlr. A. E. GLOVER (Auckland Central) urged that provision should be made for widows themselves, as well as for the children of widows.

The Hon. F. M. B. FISHER said that there were about 16,000 widows in New Zealand. To provide thom with pensions on the old age pension scale would cost .£490,000 a year—an impossible expenditure. : An Amendment. Sir ARTHUR GUINNESS (Grey) said that the meaning of income was not interpreted uniformly by different magistrates, and the law ehould bo made so clear that there could be no possibility of mistake. It had been held by some magistrates that money drawn from a bank where it had been deposited was income. This, ho contended, had never been the intention of tho Legislature. Ho moved an amendment to Clause 5 to exempt from the amount considered as income all capital nionevs drawn from a bank.

The Hon. W. F. MASSEY (Prime Minister) said he was not sure whether tho proposed amendment was an appropriation or not, and he would ask tho chairman to rule on tho question. If tho chairman ruled tho amendment an appropriation, he promised to submit the matter to Cabinet, and, if Cabinet agreed, ho would bring down some similar proposal by Governor's Message. Mr. CHAIRMAN said the amendment was not an appropriation, and was in orThe Hon. F. M. B. Fisher asked the member for Grey to withdraw hiß amendment, in view of the Primo Minister's promise. He asked that tho amendment be withdrawn, because it would assuredly increase considerably the cost of (bo widows' pension scheme, and of other pension schemes. This pensions scheme was primarily for tho purpose of helping those widows who had children, and who were in need. This new proposition would make the pension available to people who could help themselves. It was pointed out, however, that possession of a certain amount of property, whether money or land,..would disqualify a person from getting a pension. The Question of Cost, The Hon. F. M. B. FISHER said the new proposal would lead to abuses. He hoped the honourable member would withdraw his amendment until the Department could investigate what the oesfc of the new proposal would be. He could not accent tho amendment at once. The Hon. J. ALLEN (Minister for Finance) said he disagreed entirely with the Chairman's ruling, saying that the amendment was certainly an appropriaSir JOSEPH WARD (Awarua) agreed with the Minister for Finance. The new proposal would increase payments considerably, and the House ought not to be asked to vote on the question without knowing what the eflect of it would bo. Sir ARTHUR GUINNESS finally withdrew his amendment on the understanding that tho matter would be carefully Icoked into, and that the law would be put into such shape as to preclude all .possibility of mistake. A new clause was o<ld«l providing that on the death of a widow a guardian may receive pension payments on behalf of children to whom the Act applies. Tho Bill was reported with amendWhen the House resumed, the Macarthy Trust .Bill was set down for third reading and the Widows' Pensions Amendment Bill for consideration of report. THE AGED AND INFIRM. PROTECTION OF ESTATES. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN moved the eecoud' reading of tho Aged and Infirm Persons Protection Bill. He said that this was a benevolent Bill, which he was sure would commend itself to the House. There were persons unfitted by old agp to administer their estates, but against whom the provisions of the Mental Defectives Act should uot be put in operation. This Bill would enable such persons to have their estates satisfactorily administered without tho provisions of tho Menial Defectives Act being put in operation. Legislation of this character had beonenacted in France, and in that country applied not only lo persons sull'ering from eenilo decay, but also to chronic inebriate;. Tho'Bill before- the House provided for tho appointment of managers approved liy the .Supreme Court. Tho powers of the=o managers would be statutorily defined. Clause , 25 restricted tho testiuientar.v powers of protected persons. 'Die Supreme Court stood to these p6rsone in t'ne relation of enardinn. MK, fi, 11'CALL.Uil, (Wairau) .cowmoiid. _

Ed the Bill. Hβ urged that something should be done, under the BilL for (ho protectiou not only of tlio chronicincbriato, but of tho spasmodic drunkard.

Mr. 0. WITTY Uiccarton) supported the Bill.

The Hon. A. T. NC4ATA (Eastern Maori) pointed out Hint tho Bill as it stood applied to people of the Native race, nml already full and detailed provision was inndo under another Act for Natives who wore unable to conduct their affairs. Ho asked the Native Minister to consider tho matter.

Mr. G. \V. RUSSELL (Avon) said tho Government had already given an indication (in tho Legislative Council) that tho Bill was to apply to. the Native race. Under the Dill then; was no guarantee as to who would comprise the committee to administer tho estates of protected persons. The measure, would bo improved if it were enacted that the. administrator of protected estates must 1» tho Public Trustee or some other officer of the Crown.

Mr. T. M. WIIiVOBD (Hutt) eaid he had only one amendment to ask for— that it miffht be possible for the Court to niako a protection order against an habitual drunkard. The Hon. A. L. Herdman, in reply, said he could not promise Mr. AVilford to include inebriates in tho provisions of tho Bill, but he would consult with tho author of the Bill, Mr. H. D. Bell, and if it were possiblo to introduce the amendment he would do so. Ho explained again that tho Bill was not intended to protect lunatics, but people who were only feeble-minded, people who would never be committed to a mental hospital. Iho Bill did cover tho Natives, and it was intended that it should. He would consider the matter of overlapping brought forward by Mr. Ngata. The Bill was read a second time on the voices. BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION. AN AMENDING BILL. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN (Minister for Justice) moved the second reading of tho Births and Deaths Registration, Act. He explained the clauses of tho Bill, and explained also that it was purely a technical Bill, which, ho was advised, would make- for improvement in the administration of the Department. The Hon. D. BUDDO (Kaiapoi) protested that the times for registration had been unduly curtailed. Dr. TE RANGIHIROA (Northern Maori) said that the application of the Bill to tho Maori people in the matter of tho registration of deaths would prove a very serious and [difficult matter. Many Maoris in tho back-blocks died without ever having seen, a doctor, nnd if tho European law was to bo observed there would bo many inquests necessary, and inquests necessitated post-mortem examinations. Tin's would probably not bo favoured by the Natives. Sir JOSEPH WARD (Awayuat asked tho Minister to give some consideration to tho question of providing menus for tho alteration of Christian names of children. ' The Hon. A'. T. NGATA (Eastern Maori) indicated certain amendments which ho proposed to move in Committee to thoso clauses affecting the Maori race. The Bill was read a second time and the House rose at 1.3 a.m. A WRONG VOTE. Mr. Speaker montioned in the House of Representatives last night that in. a division on tho adjournment early yesterday morning the Hon. Mr. Buddo had been recorded as voting on both sides. He asked the honourable member to explain. Mr. Buddo explained that a mistake had been made, but not by him. He had in fact voted "Aye." This makes tho result of the division. 36— J, instead of 3C-5.