at the same time, and also that the allowance in sickness should not exceed two-thirds of a member's wages when at work, would greatly tend to prevent imposition. RELIEF IN SICKNESS AND OLD AGE. I consider it advisable that full pay in sickness should not be allowed for more than six cousecutive months, after which half, and then quarter pay, might be allowed. The weight of exceptional descriptions of claims, such as chronic infirinity, demanding little or no medical attention, often breaks the back of a society. The tables to which I have alluded are merely applicable to sickness in the strictest sense of the term. Another point must be fully understood: that these scales of contribution contain no margin of surplus whatever applicable to expenses of management, or remuneration for medical advice. These items of expenditure should always be met by extra contributions, levied or obtained for the purpose A wholesome control is exercised over any tendency to profusion where there is a specific levy for that particular purpose; confusion is avoided, and therefore any inadvertent inroad on the funds prevented. Many societies have entered into engagements to support members in old age, and few have been enabled to do so. This has arisen principally from paying too small a contribution, or from the money not having been applied with requisite care and prudence to produce a proper rate of interest. There is, however, a plan by which these payments may be secured, superior to all others, in consequence of its undoubted security; viz., by purchasing Government Annuities for such members as may desire to make a provi sion against old age. In the case of these annuities, the security for the money paid and for the performance of the contract is of such an unexceptionable character, that no objection can be urged against it, as the annuities are charged upon the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom; or, in other words, the Government is pledged and bound that the money shall be paid to the person entitled to the annuity when it becomes due. With respect to payments at death, care should be taken to work from correct tables, the payments regulated according to age, and the investments kept distinct from payments for other benefits. The most desirable mode is for a society to act as the agent of some reputable Life Office, paying over the money thereto, and delivering to each member the policy of the office as his security. PLACES OF MEETING. It is justly stated that a great foe to economy in conducting the affairs of these societies, is the holding the periodical meetings at public-houses. The positive waste of money arising from this very frequent, but objectionable, practice, is greater than, without examination, will be believed. More than two millions of persons in England and Wales are now members of Friendly Societies, and in most of the old societies each person does not, on an average, spend less than five or six shillings per annum, including the monthly meetings and the yearly feasts. The annual expenditure for what is, in many cases, a worse than useless purpose, will therefore not fall short of a very large annual sum. As well as the pecuniary advantage to be gained by the discontinuance of this system, much moral good would be effected, the formation of habits of intemperance being frequently laid by men who, with the best original intentions, became members of such societies. If other buildings cannot be obtained, the landlord should be paid for the room, no refreshment allowed to be supplied during business, and every discouragement given to members staying at the house for the purpose of drinking. There does not appear to me to be any necessity for meetings being held so frequently as once a month. If they were to meet quarterly, or even half-yearly, abundant opportunity would be afforded for the members to become acquainted with the state and management of their respective societies. The ordinary affairs of the society could be safely confided from meeting to meeting in the hands of a committee. A similar practice prevails in most of the London Insurance Offices, however extensive their transactions may be, general meetings of the members of these large bodies rarely taking place oftener than once a year. The practice is not found to produce any inconvenience whatever. At the same time I advocate the payments being made monthly, the stewards, clerks, or other officers, being em powered to receive them. Annual feasts, or anniversary meetings, I hold to be desirable, provided no portion of the funds are applied towards the expenses, and the attendance of members and friends is voluntary. INVESTMENT of funds. The funds of Friendly Societies must be invested in accordance with the Act of Parliament, and any other investment is not only illegal, but any trustee or other officer who should invest any part of the funds on other security than that provided by the Act, is personally liable to repay the money, and may be proceeded against before justices. NUMBER OF FRIENDLY SOCIETIES IN ENGLAND AND WALES. The number of societies enrolled and certified since 1793 is about 26,000, of which nearly 7,000 have ceased to exist. The number now in existence is nearly 20,000, and the number of members 2,500,000. The Manchester Unity had, on 1st January last, 287,573 members, the income during the last year for sick and funeral relief was £211,685, the total payments in sickness was £141,234, and funeral donations £45,778. The Ancient Order of Foresters had, on the same date, 148,562 financial and 2,016 honorary members; contributed about £70,000 per annum for siek pay, and £25,000 for funeral donations. ESTABLISHMENT ON SOUND PRINCIPLES. A society to be established on sound principles should provide for medical attendance; the establishment of a sick fund, to which no member should be admitted under 16 or over 40 years of age, and the sick allowance to cease at 60. The sum to be paid for this allowance by a person aged between 16 and 23 (for example) would be ls. per month for 10s. per week when sick. Full pay for six months, half for six months, and a quarter during the remainder of sickness. The sick pay should not amount to more than two-thirds of the man's earnings in health. Old age should be provided for by Government Annuities being purchased under 16 and 17 Vict., c. 45; and a system of endowments added to this would be found, with insurance at death, to combine all that is necessary to constitute a good society. CAUSES OF FAILURE. Insufficiency of contributions to meet the payments, particularly those relating to superannuation or old age pay, is a frequent source of failure in societies of this nature. But other causes sometimes contribute; such as the contributions not being regulated according to age; the granting of sick pay until death, or to a period when infirmity became sickness; the allowing sick pay in cases of insanity or chronic ailments; the non-division of funds according to the peculiar benefits; and the misappropriation of funds. With respect to the latter cause of failure in benefit societies, I have frequently found their funds, instead of being invested pursuant to Act of Parliament, deposited at interest with the officers or members, or in the hands of bankers, brewers, and publicans; in loan societies, and in benefit building societies, and in many instances the parties holding becoming insolvent. I am not aware of any male Friendly Society, formed for sickness alone, with an average number of members, and a table of contributions certified by an actuary, having failed when the funds were properly invested. PROVIDENT HABITS OF THE WORKING CLASSES. The number of members of enrolled and certified societies is nearly 2,500,000; with a capital of upwards of £10,000,000, of which £3,543,466 is invested in savings' banks, and with the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt. The annual payments for sickness, superannuation, and death money, are estimated at £1,500,000. In conclusion, I cannot too highly extol the provident habits of the working classes, as shown by the Savings' Bank returns, as shareholders in Benefit Building Societies, shareholders in Loan Societies legally established, and as holders of small sums in the Funds. Information and correct tables are now to be gratuitously obtained for forming these societies, and promoters of such societies are culpable, if they do not avail themselves thereof. The protection of the legislature is of great advantage, and any person whose savings are legally invested have a stake in the security of the country, proportioned not merely to the sum total of those savings, or the value of his interest in such society, but to the value of that sum to himself; and is deterred from compassing the disturbance of his native land by a personal motive, added to the influence of duty. Such a man must feel the importance of public peace and public credit, with that strong conviction which individual interest never fails to inspire; and, in answer to the objections of those who might be jealous of the support thus obtained to the ruling powers, it should be observed, that he who possesses property in a country is not interested in the stability of the administration for the time being, but in the stability of universal order and good government. With regard to a clause introduced into the Friendly Societies' Act last session, and which is considered by many to be noxious and injurious to the interests of such societies-a clause which gives power to one-fourth of the members of any society or lodge to set certain machinery in motion, with a view to the breaking up of such society or lodge-I beg to remind objectors that this clause is not so stringent as the law now in existence, by which any three members may apply to the Court of Chancery, under the Winding-up Act, and throw all its funds into that Court. But if the law, as at present constituted, be found to work disadvantageously to Friendly Societies, let their members petition the House of Commons with a view to its amendment. Parliament is not unfriendly to the provident working classes. THE WEALTH OF MIND. WHILE thousands prompted by a lust for gain, The glittering metal which doth stronger bind 'Twill point the way the ambitious soul should climb, Till it doth find a treasure lasting and sublime. ARE LODGE FUNDS THE PROPERTY OF THE DISTRICT? "Is it a fact that lodge funds are the joint property of the district;-that the members are only the managers; and, as a necessary consequence, members of insolvent lodges have an equal claim to the funds of solvent lodges with the members thereof?" Reduced from a Paper read by PROV. G.M. DANSIE, North London District, in the Marc Antony Lodge, on 31st August, 1858.-(See also vol. i. p. 498.) Ir was a custom, years ago, in almost every town, village, and hamlet in England, to have benefit clubs, upheld by working men contributing a few pence per member per week for the relief of the members in sickness, and to allow a sum for their decent interment. For a period these clubs seemed to flourish, but when members grew old, very little money was in the "box," and after a little while the "box closed," as there was no money in it; it was, however, kept open for the subscriptions of members, and after a season opened again. În such a state of affairs, many poor families were deprived of that necessary comfort they fondly believed they had provided for when calamity came upon them. It is known that thousands of such cases have unfortunately occurred, and, under such circumstances, no one can be surprised that the young men withdrew from the clubs, and after a time the old men ceased to subscribe. It is not then to be wondered at that a few thoughtful men in Manchester, knowing the relief required by the working man laid on a bed of sickness, agreed to establish societies whereby each member, on the decease of any one, should pay an equal portion to defray the expense of the funeral. By good management these clubs were tolerably successful, and out of them sprung our magnificent institution, the Independent Order of Odd-fellows, Manchester Unity. Let it then be borne in mind that, from the very commencement of this society, there was a common fund in which every member had a joint interest, viz., the sick and funeral fund. That the same principle still exists there can be no doubt; and it is my conviction that in consequence of its being firmly adhered to may be attributed the great success of this society. It was that which brought it into notoriety, and which has maintained it to the present time. Take away from it that joint interest, and you rob the Order of its stability. If there be no joint interest in the property of the society, how comes it that the general laws make such jealous provision for the government of our lodges? Referring to the 5th section of the 1st General Law, we find: "Every branch of this society shall be bound by these rules, but may make such other rules as such branch may think fit; provided such additional rules made by lodges are not inconsistent with the rules of the district and the general rules of the society; and provided also, that the rules made by districts are not inconsistent with the general rules of the society." There can then be no difference of opinion on this point, we must all conform with the general laws; and this being so, let us consider the 42nd General Law. Here we have it shown distinctly that members have a joint interest,-not only in the lodges of their own district, but in the funds of every lodge in the Unity. I think the law speaks for itself. At a discussion on the subject which heads this paper, I heard one speaker declare that before a member was entitled to his sick pay from the district, his lodge must have been previously broken up; but here we have it plainly, "that when a lodge is unable to meet the demands of its members from want of funds, such members shall become chargeable to the funds of the district." Therefore it is not necessary for a lodge to be broken up before the sick members have their sick claims on the district. This is a clear instance that every member has an interest in each lodge in his district, and provided his lodge cannot meet his wants, he has a legal claim on every lodge in his district! But the 42nd Law goes further; for should it so happen that there are evil disposed members in a lodge, who break it up, and divide the funds amongst them, it provides for the sick members left behind. What can be more simple, and more to the point? There can be but one inference, viz., if a member is in want, and his lodge cannot meet his demands, he is justly entitled to the full amount of his claim, as provided in the district rule for the relief of district members, against every lodge in his district; and if this be true, and I cannot understand how it can be doubted, what is the simple logic? Why, that lodge funds are for the relief of its own members, and for the members of those lodges in their district who cannot meet the just demands of their members! It is urged by some, in consequence of one part of this law stating that Unity members' claims are to be met by a levy of sixpence per member per annum, and district members one shilling per member per annum, that if either of these sums fall short of the relief required, the sick members are not entitled to, and cannot recover, more; but looking at it in that light, is, in my opinion, taking a very narrow view of the case. I am inclined to the belief that the amounts are so fixed, because nothing like the sum specified is ever likely to be wanted to meet such cases, but should at any time more be required, does any one doubt but the law would be immediately altered to meet the requirements? I feel still more assured this would be done from the last portion of the law, which states, that the above amounts shall be given "until a uniform rate of payments and benefits exist throughout the Order ;" and if that means anything at all, it means, that, should a uniform rate of payments and benefits exist, the members in sickness, &c., shall have every and the same benefit, whether their lodge or district have broken up or no-thereby giving them a most decided claim for their sick and funeral pay on every lodge in the Unity; and this proves satisfactorily that the whole funds of the society are the joint property of every lodge and member in it! In the 67th General Law it is specified, that each district in the Unity shall fix the amount of contributions to be paid by the members;" if the framers of our laws did not consider that each member had a joint interest in the funds, why the necessity of making this provision? The 128th Law provides that no lodge shall be allowed to divide its funds, or break up, except in conformity with the 13th clause of the 18th and 19th Vic, cap. 63; and under that, if a lodge breaks up, a sufficient sum is bound to be allowed on behalf of those members who may not wish to leave the society, as shall be found necessary upon a fair computation. If there is no joint interest in the funds, what good reason could have suggested the 141st Law, which reads, "No lodge shall be allowed to sit under any laws but those adopted by the Order in general, or bye-laws made in conformity with the laws of their district and the general laws of the Order;" that uniformity should exist there is no doubt this law was provided, but is it likely that lodges should be called upon to act uniformly only, in so far as the mere conducting of the business? The 145th Law is very stringent upon the initiation and over-age fees; and why should this be necessary, if members have no claim on other lodges but that they have claims on other lodges I think we shall see beyond dispute; the 245th General Law relates to clearance, |