RETROSPECTIVE MARRIED ALLOWANCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17690, 30 July 1919, Page 10

RETROSPECTIVE MARRIED ALLOWANCE.

PROBLEMS OF DISTRIBUTION. The Government's munition that retrospective separation allowiuico grants would xj satisfactorily settled about the lirst week m June has been carried into effect as lar as possible, but through •- various causes a. number of the applications have not yet been finally dealt with, and may be Relayed lor tome time to come. This has been mainly due, at the outset, to the difficulty— unprecedented in tho short liistorv °t ttie department—in eliectually coping f iUI sudden rusli of applications which, troni tile time .the Jirst payments were made, have poured through tho post in a seemingly unceasing- flow. A further comp .ca ion has been provided by tho neccs:v ot past rccords to a greater extent than was at first anticipated, and inquiries of an exhaustive nature have been loumi essential in a surprisingly large number of cases with the object of deciding who is entitled to receive the various sums anected. Lastly, there are salient features 01 too present scheme which do not as vo* appear to be clearly understood by the general public, and much unnecessary cor--1 espondeiico, with its attendant delays, has resulted. J Up to July 14 warrants to tho number of e /.S'°™ re P resc nting a total outkvy of £257,(89. The lirst estimate provided tor tho payment of, roughly.. 12.000 claims and lor tho expenditure of £495,000. It may, therefore, be assumed that slightly less than half the applications are stiil awaiting final action, and that approximately the same proportion of tho moneys originmlly allocated has yet to be distributed. Of the above warrants, 399 were ijiKn amoun '' s ovcr no fewer than 1409 represented in each case £50 and over. Tho applications made disclose a good <. T nllsa PP rell ens:on regarding the grails In many cases it has been erroneously assumed that it forms nart of the soldier s pay but as a matter of fact tho present payment represents a Government grant 10 the wife or guardian concerned to supplement tho assistance already received trom the soidier, and is not made as a matter of course, and cannot be claimed by either of the parties immediately as a matter of right. • , oc ? £ain P r °P° r tioii of the applications included a reference to children's allowance, ana many claims have also been received irom. \yidowed mothers and other dependents. lho present schcmo does not, however, provide for a retrospective grant to other than a soldier's wife or to the guardian of his motherless children—and then only where tho ordinary separation allowance has been creditied to his account. General misapprehension also appears to exist regarding the_ dates between which the grant is effective. In the first place, pay- , a .r°. ma de only up to December 31. J. 917 (wife) and to April 30, 1918 (guardian), as, from January 1 and May 1, 1918, respectively, tho full allowance of 3s a day m each case has already come into effect. Many claimants have made tho error of •lodging applications for periods up to tho time of discharge or decease after the dates quoted, the erroneous impression havin£ apparently gained ground that L he fcrant is payable in respect of the full period of service. Another important feature which majiy have overlooked is that pay-

ment for any camp period is not included, inns, tho ivife of a soldier who sailed with any reinforcement later than the 33rd draft, in-!!? embarked at the end of December, 1917, is placed outside tho scope of tho grant. In tho same way, where the soldier j r , e " or ted f° r duty after service abroad, and has not again embarked, the grant is made effective up to the date of ro-ontor-ins: camp only, and not to also cover his second period of training with a. later reinforcement. A somewhat unpleasant phase of tho.question is that retrospective grants have been forfeited on account of misconduct, or like circumstances. The policy of the department is that where a wife has been guilty of misconduct (whether the soldier has obtained a divorce or otherwise) and there are children to be considered, the payment is made through some responsible person or society. Several of the patriotic organisations m tlip different ccntxcs have already agreed to assist tho department, and a. number of cases have been disposed of in this manner, Iliose societies having in practically every instance a visiting staff of ladies and gentlemen, closely interested in the general welfare of soldiers and their families for over four years, aro admirably suited to undertake this fresh responsibility, and it is thus confidently expected that the arrangement will prove of the greatest benefit to the dependents affected. In every case where the soldier makes certain allegations against his wife as grounds for an objection to her receiving tho grant, full and impartial .investigation is made through a reliable channel. If the charges are proved, the course outlined above is followed where possible. In no such instance, however, can the allowance be claimed by the soldier, and, generally speaking, where there are no dependents, the grant is considered to have been definitely forfeited, so far as both parties are concerned. _ Every endeavour is made to treat each claim governed by such circumstances entirely on its merits, and a decision arrived at accordingly. Unexpected difficulties have been presented where the disbursement of the moneys for motherless children is concerned. It has been found that many soldiers who appointed guardians upon their departure overseas have made new arrangements since their return, and that they have either themselves assumed control, or appointed other persons to look after their children. These cases may be brought under three headings:—(l) Application by the guardian ' P _ has received the ordinary allowance and is still acting in the capacity; (2) application by a new guardian who has assumed control since the soldier's return; (3) application by the soldier himself, who is again caring directly for his dependents. In either of the first or second instances application should be made by the guardian, but to avoid unnecessary trouble it is advisable that this should be supported by a written statement from the 6oldier confirming the appointment of a guardian, and stating that he is agreeable to tho retrospective gpnt being paid to this person direct for the children's benefit. In the second instance, the authority from the ■ soldier should embrace an explanation of the change of guardianship. ° Where the soldier himself is the applicant, he should clearly show that his children aro directly under his control." In this event, the department reserves the right to detude whether tho allowance is to be paid to him direct or through some organisation for disbursement in the manner already indicated. Applications continue to be received from men who were employed on home service, chiefly on the plea that they were retained in camp, although to all intents and purposes fit for active service. Apaxt from the consideration that tho general conditions governing the allowance make it perfectly clear that such cases aro not provided for in the present scheme, it is emphasised that, in a general way, men so treated have already received in tho shapo of promotion (which in all probability would have been denied them under active service conditions), with its increased pav and allowances and extra duty pay, what is almost, if not more than, the equivalent *of the retrospective allowance. Tnis in itself is held to justify tho decision not- to extend tho retrospective grant to men who would thus receive a oollectiy.e rate of remuneration out of all proportion to the value of their services and to tho measure of their sacri II CO.