CORRESPONDENCE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1442, 28 July 1883, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE AGED MEMBERS OF. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.

To the Editor, Sib —lt was with mingled feelings of pleasure and disappointment that I perused your leader of the 26th inst., on the above subject, Pleasure because you now admit the duty and absolute necessity of each member of the community making provision for old age, and disappointment at your persistently misrepresenting Major Atkinson's National Insurance scheme. The movement which you • mention as being on foot in the Old Country to make provision for aged members.,of friendly societies is (like Major Atkinson's plan) a graft from the Rev. Mr Blackley'a national providence, scheme. A " National Providence League" presided over by the Right Honorable the Earl of Shaftsbury, KG., has been in existence since 1880; the League aiuu

at performing voluntarily what Major, ; Atkmsoii' r Vftshw to make 'universal, "and therefore necessarily cohipulsory. Your announcement, therefore, that the Foresters are inaugurating a : 'fund to provide for their aged members is another eviderico of how deeply the doctrines originated by the Rev, Mr Blackley, and-advocated by, the Bishops of Winchester, Nottingham, Truro, Earls Dysart, Shaftsbury, and Stanhope, Lord Welsingham, Cardinal Manning, Major Atkinson, and other thinking men of the age, are gaining ground among the provident class of the British nation, But I would ask, Why do you persistently run amuck at Major Atkinson's scheme of National Insurance? ,'Why : don't you give it fair play? ft you have objections to it why don't';you state them? Your mere condemnation, unsupported by logical reasoning, is not sufficient to I convince, although ft may. mislead toa certain extent, buti am 'sure you do not desire to mislead your readers; While you condemn national compulsory insurance you applaud stationowners who compel their hands to contribute to, the hospital, and you urge others to suppoit ,!the same', institutions You approve of the compulsory insurance of railway servants, and you devote leaderso'f commendation to those thrifty individuals.who have formed themselves, into 1 a'society, one of the. objects of Avhichis to provide a fund for their maintenance in old.age! You cry out against the present shifty system of providing for pur charitable institutions, and yet : you'refuse to accept a legitimate plan of. compulsory national insurance, which would render charitable i institutions' unnecessary ! Now don't you think your action in objecting to compulsory insurance somewhat inconsistent ? The position yoU take up is this: you applaud " your uncles and 'your cousins and your aunts," and iii fact all your fellow colonists, for shedding their blood voluntarily, but you object to one drop of your own being compulsorily poured out at the font of national providence. You ask a man to provide for accidents and eld age by paying periodical contributions into a fund, and at the same time you insist on the same man laying by'an equal portion to provide for those thriftless persons who prefer to waste their earnings instead of paying into a providence fund; the thrifty man therefore not only lays by provision for but he is compelled, in addition to this, to pay taxes to support the improvident, Is this just? Is not Major Atkinson's scheme fairer, which insists on everyone contributing for his own future necessities? Again,you say Major Atkinson's scheme is compulsory, thereby conveying c a. wrong impression, Major Atkinson,s scheme is compulsory only so far as it insists on everyone insuring,' but he does not insist upon that insurance being made with the Government. Anyone able to show that He has made the necessary provision in & private socielij would be exempt from insurance with the Government.

When you so heartily condemn insurance in Government olees you should,'in fairness have pointed out that more than two thirds of the benefit societies in this colony, have proved, on actuarial analysis, to be financially insolvent, and the greatest caution would have to be exercised, by insisting on the contributions being sufficient to provide the promised benefits. For my part I /would prefer a national guarantee. ' In a previous article you contended that Major Atkinson's scheme is premature) you will, however, admit that no harm has been done by ventilating the subject. Major Atkinson does not desire to force his scheme into law, his object has. been simply to set people thinking on tho matter, and when the nation comes to learn and understand tho value of his proposals, then and not till then will compulsory National Insurance become the law of the land. I&m&c,