The Daily Telegraph. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1883.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3629, 28 February 1883, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1883.

Mr E. A. Lewis has requested us to make mention of his appointment a.s resident agent at Napier for the Government Life Assurance Department. We shall proceed to do so, not, perhaps, quite as Mr Lewis would like, but from the only point of view from which we imagine his appointment can be regarded by holders of policies. With Mr Lewis personally we have of course nothing , whatever to do. He was, we believe, one of the clerks in the head office at Wellington, and, being singled out for promotion, was appointed the agent here. In that capacity he no doubt will continue to be a meritorious and efficient officer. We have no fault to find with him; it is with his appointment that we have to complain. On this subject Aye may use the editorial '' we in the fullest sense of the expression. A large proportion of the staff of the Daily Teleokapii hold policies of insurance in the Government department, and some of us have withdrawn from rival associations in favor of it. But we have not confined our enquiries to the staff of this journal. Go ■where we will wo can find but one expression of opinion with regard to the recent change made in the local .agency. We need scarcely say that that opinion is the reverse of complimentary to the management. Early this month we noticed in our exchanges some criticisms on the subject to which we are now referring". We took no further notice of them, as we preferred waiting to see whether the changes that had called forth these animadversions were merely local or whether they were to mark a new departure in the management of the department. We had not to wait long. Mr Lewis arrived here about the middle of the month, and the day before yesterday he advertised his appointment. Our morning contemporary, in noticing Mr Lewis' appointment, has the following , : —"The work of this office has hitherto been performed most efficiently by Mr Grubb, but the business has of late grown to such proportions that it is considered necessary to appoint an officer to tako the sole charge of it." We have reason to believe that the above observation is not a true one. Wo are under the impression that the work of this district has by no means increased beyond the power of MrGrubb to as efficiently perform hisduty as hitherto. Moreover, as it will be no part of the duty of Mr Lewis to canvass for "lives," we. fail to see how his appointment will have any other effect on the department than to increase its working expenses. Mr Lewis receives a salary that amounts, we are given to understand, to about twice as much as Mr Grubb received in commissions by way of remuneration. It therefore becomes the direct interest of policy holders to enquire into the benefits they arc likely to derive from this extra expenditure. In taking - out a policy of life assurance one of the chief advantages held out was, over and above the absolute seem'ity, the prospective profits, which Avere to be divided every five years, arising from the work of the department being for the most part conducted by already salaried officers. The Post Office and the Life Assurance Office were asserted to be but portions of the same department. The amalgamation of offices Avas indeed a part of the policy of the Government, and the utmost confidence was reposed in the Ministry that the terms offered to policy holders would be faithfully adhered to. In the apparent separation of the Life Assurance Department from that of the Post Office Aye see a departure from that line of economy which it was promised should be the characteristic of the Government business, in contradistinction to that of rival associations. From the Wanganui Herald of the 2nd instant avc learn that the cost of the Government Life Asssurance is alarmingly on the increase. Our Wanganui contemporary says:—"lf Aye take tAVO years, the comparison ,will tell a talc. For the financial year 1880-81 the cost of the department was £20,500, omitting the special item of £2000 voted for the quinquennial investigation. For the year ISB2-83 the expenditure has risen to the alarming , total of £33,900, or, deducting JEGOOO set against the industrial branch, £27,900—an increase of about £7000 jn two years. We cannot suppose the bWnesrs done will warrant such an expenditure as these figures denote. We arc aware the department is ready to meet us with the argument that the percentage of expenditure on business done has not increased. That may be true, but then the percentage, from the fact that a perfect auxiliary organisation in the Post Office has always existed, and been assisting, should show a' continual decrease. The department, in presenting its figures of comparsion with other offices, is only throwing , dust in the eyes of the policy-holders, who have a right to a great deal more than they arc getting, considering the in favor of the department, and to something more than the policy-holders' of another office. The department appears to be growing reckless, and if it is alloAvcd to go on in its present course we shall have the Post Office set aside altogether, and flash buildings erected at an enormous expense as au investment for the accumulating funds of the institution. A timely warning aa . not come amiss to the policy -holdora i as well as to the Government, Tha Post Oflice is exactly adapted for work of this kind. It is already the Savings Bank of the people, and can very Avell manage the business brought to it in the first instance "by the travelling agents. The expenses must J

be kept down. They are growing beyond all reason and bounds, and the policy- s; holders, who are directly interested, must » take the matter in hand if no one else will. t. The extravagance begins, and receives its most forcible illustration, in the head office. The Commissioner, as if his office were c ] parti}* a sinecure, is also Dcputy-Conimis- j, sioncr of Stamps. Then there is doing his work an officer who has been designated "Superintendent of Agents," receiving * £400 a year and commission out of agents' -*■ commission, which brings his remuneration ° up to something not far short of £800 a *= year. It is surprising that no member noticed this anomaly last session. The as- c sumption was at one time that the chief c function of the Commissioner himself was T i to "superintend" the njrents. What else > has lie to do except put his name to docu- t ments ? Tho calculations and accounts are made and controlled by the actuary and the j secretary. Again, is it not a scandal and a shame that an officer receiving a high ( salary and sitting in his office at. Welling- j ton, should be allowed to supplement his ] income by taking a portion of the commis- , sion earned by the canvassing agents throughout the colony? Then they have got £200 down for a "lecturer." This is another scandal. Every agent is more or ] less a lecturer, and lecturing has always ' been considered an adjunct of the agent's : business. It is strange that wo never hear ] of this lecturer or of his brilliant appeals on ' behalf of tho household virtues. The ' chief medical officer receives £400 a year, 1 and what he does has alwaj-s been a perfect mystery. The examining medical officers 1 in tho different districts who are paid by f fees, do the whole of the practical Avork of ' passing proposals, and have really all the i responsibility. There is a lump sum of i £10,000 put down for "commission," " and yet, notwithstanding tho magni- ' tncle of the sum, there is no return giving i the particulars. The fact is that, : because the department is supposed to be self-supporting and no charge on the • general body of the taxpayers, no one ' thinks it his business to enquire very '. minutely into its working. The general taxpayer, however his responsible for any deficiency, and tho Government is directly i chargeable with the efficiency and economy of the administration. Last session the Colonial Treasurer brought down a bill providing for the constitution of a board of management, but through the hurry at the end it did not get through. The best feature of the measure is tliat it gives the policy-holders two representatives, who will be supposed to look after the interests of their constituents. But even then the primary responsibility will necessarily belong to the Government, where it has really been from the first. The question strikes •us, why the Colonial Treasurer, in whose portfolio the department is placed, decs not overhaul it, and get rid of the extravagance and scandals which notoriously exist ? If tho " Superintendent of Agents," or the actuary, is really the Commissioner, this official might be confined to the " Stamps." If the "Superintendent" is earning £800 a year, the estimates should show the fact. If the " medical officer " docs any work, the nature of it might be indicated by a sufficient description. If £10,000 all go to the working bees, and none to the di'oncs, a detailed return would not be an unnecessary waste of stationery. And if there is any motive, good or bad, in shunting the Post Office, it ought to be made to appear. In the interest of tho policy-holders and the public alike, the various matters ought to be investigated. Generally, the department is suffering from the want of intelligent criticism in the House, and the absence of an effective control. We have only alluded to some of the transparent anomalies and aparent abuses. It is reasonable to infer that if those exist on the surface there will be others lurking in the recesses."