APPENDIX (E.)

FRIENDLY AND OTHER SOCIETIES IN THE COLONIES AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES IN THE SEVERAL AUSTRALASIAN COLONIES.

The following is a statement of the number of Friendly Societies, branches, and members, also the total amount of funds to the credit of such societies, in the several colonies of Australasia, at the latest date for which particulars have supplied :

been

The Report of Mr. Evan F. Owen, Actuary for Friendly Societies, on the condition and progress of Friendly Societies in 1898, shows that at the end of that year there were 31 societies having 1,088 branches and 88,726 members, an increase during the year of 7 branches and 4,714 members. The contributions paid during the year were 250,5471., equal to 31. 8s. 6d. per member. The sick pay was 111,0687., equal to 17. 10s. 5d. per member; the funeral money, 22,0287., equal to 6s. ; medical attendance and medicine, 89,6471, equal to 17. 4s. 6d. per member. The total capital of the societies at the end of the year was 1,220,2767., equal to 137. 15s. 1d. per member. (These equivalents relate to effective members only.) The interest realised was at the rate of 3.63 per cent., and the rate of interest earned appears to be diminishing.

New Zealand.

From the twenty-second Annual Report of Mr. Edmund Mason, the Registrar of Friendly Societies and Trade Unions, relating to the year 1898, it appears that two Friendly Societies, 18 lodges, courts, or tents, and one Working Men's Club were registered in that year. The total number on the register is 34 Societies, 535 branches, and 13 clubs. The number of returns received was 432, having 32,670 members and 637,0117. funds, of which 480,6317. was invested at an average rate of interest of 5 per cent., and 117,5117. is the value of land and buildings.

a

On an appeal from a refusal by the Registrar to register certain amendments to the rules of the Otago District of the Manchester Unity of Oddfellows, it was agreed to simplify procedure and minimise expense, that a special case should be brought before a Judge in chambers at Dunedin, the place of establishment of the society. Mr. Justice Pennefather acquiesced, but said that it must not be regarded as precedent, as he thought it more convenient that on future occasions the appeal should be by an application for a rule in the nature of a mandamus, and gave judgment as follows:"According to the rules of the district now in force the secession and dissolution of lodges are treated of together. Rule 13 provides that no lodge shall be allowed to secede or dissolve without the consent of the District Committee. Any lodge being desirous of seceding or dissolving is first to call a special general meeting; every member is to have twenty-one days' notice thereof; the summons calling the meeting is to require the member to fill up a form stating whether he assents to or dissents from proposed secession or dissolution, when, if three-fourths of the members, and not less than five-sixths in value, are in favour thereof, application is to be made for the consent of the District Committee. Should the District Committee see fit to sanction the secession or dissolution, certain steps are to be taken. In other words, at present the necessities for either secession or dissolution are (1) the consent of the District Committee, and (2) the consent of three-fourths of the members (being not less than five-sixths in value) of the lodge. Under the proposed new rules secession and

the

dissolution are divided, the necessities for secession being (1) the consent of the District Committee, and (2) the consent of three-fourths of the members of the lodge. But for dissolution, the necessities are to be the same as at present. The Revising Barrister has objected to the consent of the District Committee being required for secession; and in the case of dissolution he objects to the proviso as to three-fourths of the members-he would only retain the words "five-sixths in value of the members." His grounds of objection are - (1) That the provision as to unconditional consent of the district is arbitrary and unreasonable; (2) that such a provision would not, in accordance with the English practice, be registered in England; and (3) that the general rules of the Order contain no such provision as to consent by a district or the parent society. It must be observed that of these grounds of objection the first and third deal with secession only; the second may possibly deal with that, or with dissolution, or both: also, that the objections are not to amendments of the rule, but to the retention in the amended rules of provisions now contained in the existing rules. The first question to consider, therefore, is, whether the Revising Barrister is acting within his authority in objecting to certify rules on these grounds. If he is given a discretion and acts within it, no doubt this Court would be very slow to interfere with his exercise of it, although an individual Judge might think that had he been in the position of the Revising Barrister he would have decided differently; but, if the Barrister goes outside the limits of his discretion, it is the duty of this Court to restrain him. In order to ascertain the position of the Revising Barrister, it is necessary to refer to several Acts concerning friendly societies. By No. 28 of 1856, section 6, it was provided that all rules adopted by a society should, when made, altered, or amended, be transmitted to the Attorney-General or Barrister, for the purpose of ascertaining whether they were according to law; and the AttorneyGeneral or Barrister was required to examine them, and see that they were framed in conformity with the law-that no rule, or part thereof, was repugnant to another, and that the same were reasonable and proper. Strange to say, however, the certificate he was to give was merely to the effect that the rules were in conformity to law and to the provisions of the Act. That Act was repealed in 1867. By No. 10 of 1867, section 13, the Governor was empowered to appoint a Revising Barrister to peruse the rules, and alterations and amendments of rules, of such societies; and by section 14 it was provided that the rules of a society should be transmitted to the Revising Barrister, and, if it should appear to him that any of them were repugnant to or inconsistent with the Act, or any of the laws in force in New Zealand, or that any of the requirements of the Act had not been complied with, he should notify the same to the secretary, specifying in what particulars the rules were so repugnant or inconsistent; but if, on examination and perusal, the rules should appear to him consistent with the provisions of the Act and the laws in force in New Zealand, and that the requirements of the Act had otherwise been complied with, he should certify accordingly. And by section 17, in the case of amended rules, it was provided that if the Barrister should find that such alterations, amendments, or new rules were in conformity with the law, he should certify accordingly. The form of certificate was practically the same as under the former Act. It appears from the foregoing that the power which was given to the Attorney-General or Barrister by the Act of 1856 to examine whether rules (and possibly the words might be held to include amendments of rules) were reasonable and proper was taken away in 1867. This Act was repealed in 1877, but its provisions were practically re-enacted by No. 10 of that year, except that with reference to amendments the words used-section 12, subsection (6)--were "not contrary to the provisions of this Act." The Act of 1877 was in its turn repealed in 1882, when the Act was passed which is now in force. By it the provisions of the Act of 1877 were re-enacted with merely verbal alterations. The discretionary power contained in the Act of 1856 has therefore never been revived. It has, indeed, been argued that the word "perusal " in section 9, subsection (7), implies an authority to the Barrister to consider generally wherever a rule is desirable or not; but the answer is that the object with which the Barrister is to peruse the rules is to see whether they are inconsistent with law. Again, a suggestion has been made that there is an inherent power in the Barrister, or the Registrar, or this Court to decide whether a rule is reasonable, analogous to the case of a byelaw; but the analogy is a misleading one, for there is a a wide difference between the laws of a subordinate Legislature, which may bind all persons resident in the district, and the rules of a private society, which can affect only the members. I am of opinion, therefore, that the Revising Barrister exceeded his jurisdiction in refusing to register these rules on his first and third grounds of objection. I must still, however, examine his second ground. Here, if it were shown to me that the powers of the Registrar in England were exactly the same as those of the Barrister here, and that the Registrar had refused to sanction rules like these on the ground that they were contrary to law, I might hesitate before differing from the decision of so learned and experienced an officer. By the Act of 1885 (18 & 19 Vict. c. 63) section 26, power is given to the Registrar, on the formation of a society, to advise with the secretary, if required, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the rules transmitted to him are calculated to carry into effect the intentions and objects of the persons who desire to form such society; and if he finds that the rules are in conformity with law and the provisions of the Act, he shall certify accordingly. In the case of amendments, he is to give his certificate if the amendments are in conformity with law. By the Act of 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 60), section 10, subsection (4), it is enacted that the central

or not.

office shall exercise all the functions and powers which were then by law vested in the Registrar of Friendly Societies. No doubt, if the Registrar was of opinion that a rule like the present one would not carry into effect the object of the persons desiring to form a society he might advise with the secretary on the subject: but no case has been cited, or evidence produced, to show that the Registrar has ever refused to sanction such an alteration of a rule. It is true that the consent of the central body was not required in the case of the Order of Druids ex parte Sheffield, in Schofield v. Vause (Law Cases affecting Friendly Societies, p. 104), or in Wilkinson v. Jagger (Ib., p. 181): but the Court never considered the question whether such a condition would have been proper I am of opinion, therefore, that if an application were made for an order in the nature of a mandamus to compel the Registrar to register these amendments it should be granted. I come now to the consideration of the two questions which have been asked in the special case: (1.) It has hardly been contended-nor can it be that any of the proposed rules are repugnant to or inconsistent with "The Friendly Societies Act, 1882," or any of the laws in force in New Zealand; the Registrar has grounded his refusal on other reasons. I answer this question in the negative. (2.) Section 16, subsection (1), (c), appears to me to have no bearing on the case: it deals with societies, not branches. It has been ingeniously argued that it might deal with branches in consequence of subsection (8), (g), as the letter "g" is probably a misprint for "9," and the sentence should be printed as a separate subsection instead of a mere division of subsection (8); and this contention is supported by a comparison with the former Act and the English Act of 1875, section 25. But, even if that be so, the words do not apply at present, as the consent of the central body has not been obtained.

In accordance with this decision the complete amendment of the society's rules was thereupon registered, as though on an order of the Supreme Court.

Societies, upon application to the Registrar, may have their valuations made free of cost. According to the experience of those valued, their sickness claims have been heavy.

The following interesting table shows the ratio to the total of the sickness in the first six months, in the second six months, and after twelve months respectively, in quinquennial age-periods. After age forty there is a continuous decrease in acute sickness and a continuous increase in chronic sickness, the latter at the ages above fifty-five being considerably more than one-half of the total.

Detailed Account by Dr. KURSTEINER, of Gais, of the Alterations introduced into the Federal Insurance Scheme.

I.-General Remarks.

Under date of October 5 ult., the Federal Insurance Statute, of which a short summary was given in the Chief Registrar's Annual Report for 1894, has at length been promulgated in its final shape, which it got after a lengthy and protracted debate in the Chambers; but, owing to the demand for the "referendum" having been signed by just four times the requisite number of voters, the ultimate fate of the measure will be decided on by the people on the 20th May inst.

As had been anticipated beforehand (cf. Rep. 1895, p. 232 below), in addition to both branches of the insurance scheme against sickness and accidents, there has been introduced a mode of extension of the same principle to persons engaged in military service; and, accordingly, the whole scheme has since been consolidated in one statute of 400 sections, of which 216 relate to sickness insurance, the following 113 to accident insurance, 48 to military insurance, and 23 deal with correlated enactments, or contain introductory and transitory provisions.

The statute will come into operation for all its purposes, in case of its being ratified by the people, on January 1, 1903 only, the obvious reason for this long postponement being the accumulation in the meanwhile of a fund by the State out of its ordinary revenue, in connection with the financial basis of the scheme, mention of which will be made again further on.

The bills had been laid before the Chambers, accompanied by a special message of the Federal Council dated 21st January 1896, which in its turn was since supplemented by a statement concerning the financial arrangements, under date of 13th April 1897. Select committees of both Chambers were then elected for the consideration of the bills, that of the National Council consisting of 15 members, among whom was M. Forrer, the untiring author of the scheme. The deliberations of the latter committee occupied no less than 58 sittings between 24th February 1896 and 12th May 1897, an elaborate summary of 339 pages in folio having since been published. That committee, upon which sat exponents of different shades of opinion, political and economical, did excellent work in that it wrung important concessions from the promoters of over-centralising tendencies of the scheme in favour of an organisation more compatible with cantonal administration; and, furthermore, by safeguarding the position of existing voluntary associations under the new régime of compulsory insurance, and in the third instance through alleviating the charges of the scheme pressing with undue severity on small employers of labour, such as landowners, artizans, shopkeepers, and so on. In this way alterations have been introduced, more detailed mention about which will presently be made, all of which had the much-desired effect of uniting the efforts of the committee towards a speedy solution of the vexed problem.

But there remained yet another obstacle to be overcome in the shape of the financial side of the question, the original proposal for the creation of some new source of revenue having met with no particular favour in the forenamed committee. At length a compromise was arrived at on the basis of a reduction of the State subsidy in aid of the scheme by about 2 million francs a year, being conceded by the committee, the Executive Government, on the other hand, by its supplementary message of 1897, undertaking to find the means towards making out of the ordinary revenue the yearly grant of a sum reduced to about 5,300,000 francs. Of course, with a diminished income

of the scheme, its expenditure had to be readjusted correspondingly, either by redistribution of charges between the contribuent partners, or by curtailment of allowances. In this connection, as will be seen further on, the compromise entered into by the committee failed to recommend itself before parties chiefly concerned in the matter, which therefore had to be reconsidered in the Chamber.

Finally, the bills, together with the amendments introduced by its committee, were brought up for discussion in the National Council during the summer session of 1897, which was followed by an extra session in autumn of the same year, when no less than 14 days in June and three in October were wholly spent upon the consideration of the scheme. Among the controversial points to be settled, besides those previously mentioned as having engaged the attention of the committee, there was one of primary importance to the medical profession at large, as to the position it should receive under the scheme, and it was to its entire satisfaction that the degrading system of so-termed "Kassenaerzte," prevailing in Germany, in the end came to be definitely relinquished.

When, just a year later, the States Council, the other branch of the Legislature, subsequent to a deliberation of its own committee, composed of 11 members, took up the consideration of the matter, most of the arduous task had already been solved; yet, having due regard to the great questions involved, some of the more important points were discussed over again on eight days in June 1898. Incidentally an amendment may be mentioned, which, having been negatived by the National Council, found favour with the States Council, and was then ultimately affirmed by the former Chamber likewise, to the effect of eventually giving free choice to employers and workmen, whenever they should prefer a common management of their "Krankenkassen" instead of separate meetings of each body connected with them, a concession being thus made towards mutual understanding between different classes, which happily may still be seen prevailing, in rural parts of the country at least.

In the autumn session of 1898 the bill on military insurance was passed by both chambers, which, though outwardly assimilated to the insurance scheme of the civic population, is more in the nature of a revised military pension fund, the expenses falling wholly to the charge of the State, and the framing of which having been entrusted to the care of an eminent actuary, M. Kinkelin of Basle, caused no great stir in publicity, by comparison with the two other bills then already settled. At length, in 1899, the final touch was given to the whole scheme, by recasting the three separate bills as component parts of the consolidated Act, and the scene closed with a great financial debate, how to get the means required to meet the burden incumbent on the public purse; because, contrary to the compromise previously entered into, the subventions in aid of the sickness and accident branch had in the meanwhile, owing to different votes by the Chambers, again been raised by about 2 million francs a year. This necessitated the creation of a fund out of the revenue surplus for the next few years to come, and at the same time a corresponding postponement of the operativeness of the statute.

As to the final verdict of the people, it would be idle to be over-confident. Notwithstanding the favourable vote in the Chambers, which was next to unanimous, the demand.

for the referendum has been most successfully launched. Very naturally, indeed, it might be expected that, in a country with generally well-developed institutions for thrift, mutual co-operation, and charity, such an elaborate system of uniform State-aided insurance against the pecuniary risks of employment could not but evoke misapprehensions and jealousies more or less justified. In a canton like Appenzell Outor Rhodes, for instance, with numerous benefit clubs in every village, in the aggregate counting one member for every five inhabitants (cf. Report, 1882, p. 31), there seems to be but little prospect of an affirmative vote by the people. Probably a good many of those scattered clubs, with no other bond of union between them than that of a mutual agreement for unconditional transfer of members changing their residence, would be doomed to disappear through losing their best elements, henceforth to be compulsorily insured under the new régime. It may be otherwise with a great centralised society like that in the canton of Berne, with local clubs all over the canton, presided over by an enlightened central board of management, inasmuch as it might conveniently be transformed into a registered body, reaping the benefits accruing from such a position, considering which its delegates have pronounced themselves favourably to the scheme. On the whole, it may justly be said that the leading feature of the insurance system, which is to release the principle of liability from its many shortcomings and inequalities, commends itself alike to unbiassed philanthropists and those directly interested in it, workmen as well as employers. Significantly enough, such an influential organisation as the "Grütli Union," composed as it is of the flower of working people, and an impartial mind like that of Bishop Egger of St. Gall, concur in these latter days in their acknowledgment of the beneficial tendencies of the scheme. Whether these will in the end outweigh the equally justified aversion of the Swiss people to the admixture of "bureaucratism" and State-socialism in the scheme remains now to be seen. Evidently it is from this point of view that the alterations introduced in the original bills, which have yet to be considered in detail, onght to be regarded. In giving a short summary of them, the corresponding provisions of the new statute may conveniently be conferred with the sections, as enumerated in the above-cited Report of 1894. Of course the most important stipulations only need here be reviewed.

II.-Detailed Summary of Amendments.

1. The first set of amendments, which were more of a political character, having in view to meet the objections of the Federalist group of opponents, especially strong in the French and primitive cantons, have been introduced in relation to the territorial organisation of the sickness insurance (ss. 10-14 of the former project), combined with the superintending authorities (ss. 154-163). In the place of those purely bureaucratic territorial divisions, termed "insurance circles," there have now stepped in the cantons, every one of whom will either become an insurance circle for itself as a whole, or may be subdivided into a convenient number of them, with the intention, prescribed by 8. 24 of the Act, that each circle is to have its own "Krankenkasse." Consequently, the former somewhat arbitrary division into insurance circles and communes has vanished, being superseded by formations of a more habitual type. And, in accordance therewith, the supervision in the sickness brauch will be exercised no more by federal functionaries, but through the medium of authorities, instituted by the cantons. Conversely, it is for the cantons in their new situation under the Act (s. 13), to be held responsible for the mode of management of their respective insurance circles, after the manner of a subsidiary guarantee. Of course, the intermediate supervision by the cantonal authorities, being provided for in ss. 171-178 of the Act, is of no avail whatever in the accident branch, the latter being exclusively in the nature of a centralised institution, with the local" Krankenkassen as their subordinate agencies. In order to secure good management and uniformity in the working of the scheme throughout the net of local "Kassen," there will be created distinct inspectorates, wholly dependent on the Federal Insurance Office (ss. 230-231). As to the arbitration courts of the circles, provided for in ss. 164171 of the former project, they will be likewise set down, after the Act, by the cantons, with about the same functions as were assigned to them heretofore (ss. 182-187).

2. Another group of amendments was being concerned with the unfavourable condition of certain branches of the national industry, viz., agriculture and trades, followed mostly by small employers, who almost necessarily are competing at great disadvantage in the open market. Having been exempted from the operations of the liability Acts yet in force, they were, of course, but little inclined to accept the burden incumbent on employers under the insurance scheme. This had been the origin of the idea of a State grant being given in aid of industries and agriculture in distressed circumstances, which, however, became to be extended to whatever employments alike under the scheme. Afterwards another grant exclusively to be applied for those depressed trades and agriculture, in the shape of a second "Federal centime," added to the daily sickness premium, this time termed the "peasants centime," was being taken into consideration, but, owing to the financial difficulties connected with the whole scheme, had to be struck off the programme for the present at least, and will only be eventually decreed at some future stage by the Chambers (s. 78, 3rd al.). A more practical proposition, now virtually embodied in s. 91 of the Act, originally sustained by M. Gisi of Soleure, a member of the select committee, was to the following effect: considering that hands employed in agricultural and those smaller industrial pursuits usually get their livings from the