Transfer, Disputed.

Award that sufficient of twenty-five Savings Certificates held by Robert Henry Parker (No. X 247376) be repaid to pay the Treasury fee for this award, and that such fee be paid to the Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies accordingly and that the application of X with regard to the said certificates be dismissed.

Amount, Disputed.

(c) WAR STOCK AND BONDS.

Dispute as to amount of war stock held by holder.

Esther Louisa Bishop. 50l. 4 per cent. War Stock 1925-1945. Hearing and award, 6th November.

The holder, who admittedly held 52l. 12s. 7d. 5 per cent. War Stock 1929-1947 by conversion from 50l. 5 per cent. Exchequer Bonds, 1920, and a further 521. 12s. 7d. of the same stock by conversion from 501. 4 per cent. War Stock 1925-1945, claimed that she ought to have yet a further sum of 52l. 12s. 7d. by conversion of a further 50l. 41 per cent. stock, which she had bought in January 1916, certificate No. B. 130543. This certificate in fact related to a sum of 51. which she had acquired on that date by the surrender of scrip vouchers, and it made up, together with 451. of the same stock subscribed for on July 7th, 1915 (certificate No. B. 44817) the admitted sum of 501. of the stock referred to above.

She could produce no documentary evidence in support of her case, and explained the absence of a certificate by saying that she had sent it up for conversion and had received no stock in exchange.

She sought to support her case by a recital of the interest she had received on her holdings, as follows:

The interest in the first column was in fact the interest on the admitted sum of 501. 4 per cent. Stock represented by certificates No. B. 44817 and B. 130543 together. The curious sum of 1l. 4s. 7d. received on June 1st 1917 was in fact the special sum of interest paid before conversion under the prospectus issued by the Post Office and dated 11th January 1917. The interest in the second column was, as to the first two amounts of 6s. 11d. and 17s. 6d., a repetition, less income tax, of the first two amounts together and the next four amounts together in the 3rd column. These were interest on bearer Exchequer Bonds. The coupons showed the gross amounts, and from these the figures in column 3 were copied, the amounts in column 2 being those amounts less income tax, that is to say the amounts which were paid into her banking account, from which they were copied. The discrepancy in date as to the earlier items between June 1st and August 8th was

Amount, Disputed.

due to the fact that the coupons were due on June 1st but were not presented till August 8th.

The last amount in the second column was the special interest payable on the Exchequer Bonds before conversion under the prospectus which has been already mentioned.

The Chief Registrar was clearly of opinion that the applicant was mistaken and had no ground for her claim.

Award that the claim of Esther Louisa Bishop to a sum of 501. 41 per cent. War Stock 1925-1945 alleged to have been bought in January 1916 or its equivalent in 5 per cent. War Stock 1929-1947 be dismissed. Repayment, Disputed.

Claim by former holder to be repaid the proceeds of Victory Bonds, which he alleged that he had not received.

Daniel Joseph Hart. 51. 4 per cent. Victory Bonds.

Hearings 7th, 13th May; Award, 14th May.

The case was heard first in London and subsequently at the Post Office, Portsmouth.

The Chief Registrar's written judgment was as follows:

The applicant claims to be paid the sum of 41. 10s 9d., the proceeds of sale of 51. 4 per cent. Victory Bonds, which he alleges has not been paid to him. At the first hearing he did not appear, but sent evidence by way of statutory declaration as follows:

"I had 451. (Forty Five Pounds) worth of 4 per cent. Victory Bonds, which were sold for me by the Postmaster-General about November 1923. I have only received 401. (Forty Pounds).

I am supposed to have signed a receipt for the balance of 41. odd, and to have acknowledged to an Official at Portsmouth Post Office that this was my signature. This I absolutely deny. The signature was not mine, and I did not have the money."

I thought it would be more satisfactory, in view of the nature of the case, that the applicant should have an opportunity of giving evidence fully and that the Post Office witnesses should have a similar opportunity, and therefore adjourned the hearing to Portsmouth.

The applicant, on 6th November last, called at the head office of the Post Office Savings Bank in London, primarily in order to ascertain what had happened to certain warrants for interest on his war stock and bonds, which had not reached him owing to a change of address and had been returned to the Savings Bank. When he was there he said he wanted to close up his business with the Bank and signed three requests for sale, one for 201. 5 per cent. National War Bonds, 1924, one for 201. Treasury Bonds, 1935, and one for 5l. 4 per cent. Victory Bonds. The Post Office produced at the hearing three warrants addressed to the Postmaster at Portsmouth, one for 20l. 12s. 6d. in respect of the National War Bonds, one for 201. 4s. 5d. in respect of the Treasury Bonds, and one for 41. 10s. 9d. in respect of the Victory Bonds. The former two were dated 12th November and bore a stamp showing them to have been paid on 13th November, the last was dated 10th November and bore a stamp showing it to have been paid on 12th November. The initials of the paying officer in the former two cases were "H.M.", those of Herbert Charles Manning, the initials of the paying officer in the last case were “E. W. P.," those of Ernest Walter Philpot. It was explained

Repayment, Disputed.

that the difference in the date of the warrants was due to the succession in which the documents came back from the National Debt Office, that for the Victory Bonds being returned earlier than the others.

The applicant's case is that he signed the former two warrants, but did not sign the last and that he never received the 41. 10s. 9d. On the evidence of the handwriting, I should be prepared to hold that he signed all three, and after hearing the applicant's evidence, I am convinced that his memory as to the financial transactions in which he was involved with the Savings Bank is quite untrustworthy. He suffers from considerable confusion of mind not only with regard to this transaction, but with regard to the interest which was not paid, and still more with regard to an earlier transaction with regard to the repayment of another sum of Victory Bonds and the payment of a sum in cash, arising from the conversion of some National War Bonds into this other sum of Victory Bonds. Herbert Manning who paid out the two sums of 201. odd, amounting to 401. 16s. 11d. in all, which are not now disputed, also mentioned the interesting fact that after that sum had been paid him he alleged that he had not been paid the odd 11d., and Mr. Manning had some difficulty in persuading him that he had been paid it. In addition to all this, Mr. Philpot, who paid the 41. 10s. 9d. to him, remembers the transaction perfectly well. He knew the applicant to whom he had often paid his old age pension, and who was in the habit of playing a flageolet in the streets of Portsmouth. He remembered putting a couple of pencil crosses on the warrant on either side of the space intended for the recipient's signature in order to guide him as to where he was to put it. As he was only engaged in this transaction and not in that of the following day, it is impossible that he can be confusing the two transactions. I accept his evidence as quite trustworthy on the matter.

In the face of this, of the evidence of the documents themselves, and of the obvious confusion and lack of memory of the applicant, I am bound to decide that his claim is not made out, and award accordingly.

Award that the application of Daniel Joseph Hart with respect of 51. 4 per cent. Victory Bonds No. 48647 be dismissed.

(d) SCOTLAND.

The following are selected Reports of disputes referred to the Assistant Registrar for Scotland.

Savings Certificates not delivered.

William McWhir. Savings Certificate 251.

Award 30th December 1924.

The claimant, William McWhir, paid 19l. 17s. 6d. for a Savings Certificate, and at the request of the Sub-Postmaster delayed taking delivery of the certificate, as he (the Sub-Postmaster) was busy at the time. The Sub-Postmaster subsequently committed suicide by drowning, and the certificate was never delivered to the claimant. The PostmasterGeneral had the affairs of the late Sub-Postmaster investigated, and it was found that the claimant had signed the counter part of the certificate, although the principal had not been delivered to him. The Sub-Postmaster was believed to have been in financial embarrassment. The Postmaster-General refused delivery of the certificate and the claim was referred to the Registrar, who ordered a Diet of Proof, and after

Savings Certificates not delivered.

thoroughly investigating the facts and hearing the evidence of the representative who investigated the case, held the view that the claim was an honest one and awarded that delivery of the certificate should be made to the claimant. He also found, on account of the negligence on the part of the claimant that he was liable in expenses to the extent of one fourth, the balance of expenses being paid by the Controller, Money Order Department.

Nomination.

Mary Gordon. Savings Bank of Arbroath; Deposit Account, 26l. 17s. 7d. Investment Account, 2001.

Award 15th April 1924.

On the death of the depositor her executors under her Will applied to the Bank for payment of the sums at the credit of the accounts as above. The Bank refused payment on the ground that there was a Nomination in favour of Betsy Ann Gardiner, her niece.

It was urged by the claimants that the whole sum at the credit of both accounts should be paid to them and if the Nomination held good at all then it was only effective as far as the sum on deposit current account was concerned. The Registrar awarded that the Nomination which had not been revoked was valid to the extent of 1001. of the Savings of the deceased with the Bank in accordance with the Act of 1887, 50 & 51 Vict. ch. 40, Section 31 (a), and the Trustee Savings Bank Regulations, 1900, Section 14 (2), and that the balance should be paid to the Executors. The Treasury fee was paid out of the account.

12. Registered Provident Societies. General

Summary, 1922-1923.

The table below contains summaries of the statistical information extracted from the Returns of all the registered associations with which the office is concerned. In regard to Friendly Societies, Industrial and Provident Societies, Trade Unions and Building Societies, the figures summarise the details which will appear in Parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Report. As the figures are issued in advance of the Parts of the Report referred to, any adjustments that may be found to be necessary will be made in the summaries to be included in those parts. The figures are for Great Britain.

Total Friendly Societies Act 25,208 25,150 22,265,277 22,437,294 102,455,764 108,807,255 (Carried forward).

(2) These transfers result Societies involved are included The figures for 1923, however,

(1) 1922 figures. Branch totals were not prepared for 1923. from the Industrial Assurance Act, 1923. The 1922 figures for the under their old classifications, e.g., Death and Burial Societies, &c. are separated in order to facilitate comparison of future Collecting Society totals with those relating to Societies prior to the passing of the 1923 Act. (3) Voluntary insurance only. (') Policies.