CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 12 June 1922, Page 7

CORRESPONDENCE.

I CONSERVING WAR RELIEF FUNDS. (To the Editor.) Sir, —While not wishing to enter into a controversy regarding the above, I would like to comment on your leader in Saturday’s News. The idea of setting aside a fund for soldiers who may break down in years to come, as suggested, sounds very excellent. Whether such a fund would achieve its object, and whether the scheme is practicable, are other questions. It must be remembered that such a fund has got to be administered, and annually recurring administration expenses will eventually, if not from the beginning, encroach on the capital. Apart from that, some men may break : down in one year, others in five years, others in ten years, or even longer. It would be only just and fair that a man breaking down in five years should receive the same consideration and assistance an one breaking down in, say, one year, but who is going to say that a man breaking down in ten years (or even five years) has broken down as the result of war service? Is the fund to exist until there are no longer any Taranaki soldiers? Could an executive be found to sit and control this fund for another twenty years? Then, again, men constantly change their domicile, and as the various local patriotic committees have practically all disbanded, there will be scarcely a channel through which a soldier residing outside the province could apply. Consequently, any benefit would be available only by making personal application at fund headquarters. No man will travel miles to make an application for relief. It has been stated that, in connection with past wars, funds have been hoarded in England for future contingencies, and the result is that large amounts are even to this day unI expended. Would it not have been np-r'ch ! more preferable to have spent those funds at the time? The aim of the Taranaki Association has not been to hoard, but to disburse, to distribute to those in need, and no one can argue I that a soldier suffering 40 per cent, disability or over for all time is not in need. No pension is adequate, no recompense sufficient, to meet such cases. It is recognised that men are bound to break down in years to come, and, if so, they should receive equal benefits. Instead of patriotic money being hoarded to render possible assistance, should it not be the duty of the Government to provide for such cases?—l am, etc., E. H. YOUNG, Deputy Chairman.