25 MAY 1912, Page 12

NATIONAL INSURANCE.

[TO THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."' SIR,—Mr. Comyns Carr's inaccuracy makes his ease hopeless. He has protested publicly and privately that no penalty can fall on the workman who fails to produce a card. His friend Sir Robert Morant has thrown him over without mercy. I have in my hand a white paper, "Pamphlet A" —" The Duties of Employers under Part I. of the National Insurance Act of 1911." It is marked, "Advance proof, subject to correction," but some hundreds of copies were distributed to a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce recently held at Cannon Street Hotel, when Sir Robert Morant, Mr. Claud Schuster, and Mr. J. S. Bradbury held the platform against all corners for two hours and suffered some damage from the attack. You will observe on page 2, under the sub-head "Method of Payment and Collection of Contributions," that— "Every insured person is required to provide himself with a contribution card, and his employer can demand its production at any time. It must be delivered to the employer whenever he may reasonably require it for the purpose of paying contributions, . . . If the worker fails to produce his card when the employer requires it for the purpose of paying contributions, the employer must make use of a special "Emergency Card," a supply of which can be obtained in advance at any post-office. A worker who without reasonable cause fails to deliver a contribution card when the employer requires it for the purpose of paying contributions or for production to an inspector, is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding 410."

There is no such offence named in the whole Act. Sir Robert Morant has grasped the nettle and has made use of Section 78 to create a new crime under Section 69. These regulations await approval, under Section 65, of both Houses of Parliament. Is it too much to hope that even the House of Commons will hesitate before allowing any body of Commissioners, even with so great a man as Sir Robert Morant at their head, to create new crimes outside the scope of the Act they have to administer P The reason Mr. Oomyns Carr has always denied this possibility of penalizing the employee is that, as a member of the Liberal Insurance Committee, he knows that such a course will lose votes. I think he should apologize to those correspondents of yours whom his letter of last week has so badly misled.—I am, Sir, &o.,

EXAMINER.