CORRESPONDENCE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1446, 2 August 1883, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.

TO THE EDITOR. . Sir,—Your correspondent " P" is evidently deeply in the confidence of the Registrar-General, this being so, will he add to his kindness by, telling us a little more, For instance, will he say what object that geiilleman has in V W I!! fflti&tjl}!? }H s(} fm .8 manner so he i? fond of demanding at a moment's ijotipe fponj unfortunate secretaries of sqp}<#g.' Ifi is .ye|i-kn,Q\yn ppy of the returns are fl| j )i) ijse whatever !to the societies, but it may not be so. well-known that they. are. of • great use to the Government Insurance, Department, as is shown when that Depart; ment naively declares that its tables are " based upon the sickness returns ftf s,e o)(fef friendly societies, and they are not \vantipg those wljo affirm t)mt the returns &re collected from' ilie friendly societies by the RegistryGeneral, and handed over, to the In: surance. Department to save expense and'to give it an advantage in competing, -with Insurance Companies, '-Perhaps fffy'm ielhslf this isso'or not, and if so, whether' % (3qy,epimfljft is justified in picking the grains of Secretaries tq save any ef ite depFMgfjts i expense. At any rate the amount; of clerical labor demanded from lie' societies is enormous, andaltogetTier'out of proportion to any! good /that' arises to them.Of course< alibis falls-iipon ithe Secretaries, audita effect mto deto 1 'good and cabbie men from undertaking the office, foryeryfew, if'any, of the societies are able to pay -'anything like an adequate price for the work, and it has therefore to be 'done for' poking. ,t!an you ponder then, Mr

Editor, that; theKßegistrar complains of the quality of the \vork, antl of the Jdifficultyjilieiias in getting; it done at all 'I if a Weston'-, or a laborer was tj) without;') plijp in'a similau'iinianner it an \iproar, aiicf cause a revolution that would sweep away the Registrar-General, his office, and precious statistics together; and the sooner this 'desirable'vesult isattained the better it will be for all parties concerned, unless, indeed, it may be Mr. .W, R, E, Brown. I am, etc., Another Forester. ■

TO THE EDITOR. ; ■ i ■ ; Sir,—As you have taken up the subject of friendly societies and their against -■ the - -'RegistrarGeneral, perhaps; you will r.not object to the question being ventilated in- ; your correspondence columns. Besides the irritation existing against, the methodof - valuation employed ' by ; the' :Regis-trar-General thero is a, general feeling in the. societieslst. That tho benefits of registration are nil. 2nd: That there is far too much expense and labor .imposed .upon! registered -Societies. With regard ,to tie first, to show the value placed by the; societies upon registration I may state that in one large society the • question of applying for cancellation of their registration both district and- branches is at.- pre sent occupying their serious consideration, and in the case of another society some of the branches have absolutely refused to register, ' and. defy the Registrar. With regard to the second, the cost of preparing returns and information for the Government is thrown upon the societies, and as to tlie quantity, quality,, and size of the returns, etc., the unfortunate societies are unlimited liability companies. If, as the Registrar reports, the members' contributions are insufficient, there is 'the less need of his department swallowing so much ot the monoy, The societies' have borne a good deal of vexation and expense, feeling it is essential for the good of the country and stability of the Government that some excuse should be given for maintaining au expensive department of the civil service, but there is a growing feeling that the limit of endurance is. readied when one sided reports are issued in the nick of time required to sustain Major Atkinson's pet insurance scheme. I am, (fee., Forester.

To the Editor. Sift,—Your correspondent "P.," in replying to my former letter, hp quite evaded the point at issue, jfe reposes faith in the theory of the actuarial Valuations. I quoted a case in point, shewing the absurdity of that theory when reduced to practice. "P." acknowledges in the outset that he does not understand the position, and the explanatory portion of his letter bears him out in that, He asserts that the present value of the contributions is deducted by the Government actuary from the present value of tlie benefits assured; but that is just -what is not done.' The fact is the actuary deducts the value of contributions (or assets) fron>tlie value of benefits (or liabilities) which'will not have to be paid. " P." is partly right in assuming the members to remain in the society until they die, as they don't generally remain in it subsecjupnf to t|)(it; It is, after all, only an fisspptipn,' aiid is flatly, contradicted by fjptiiaJ experience that all tho members continue membership until their decease. His closing remarks that the Registrar-General's report shows our system to be wrong, owing to inadequacy of contributions, is answered by the reply that the statistical gentleman's report is another theory totally disproved in practice. I am, etc., Forester,