Evening star., 1928-11-04
BY A. D. ROTHNIAN.

4 4 legislation, is now about TO ven-
ture into the newest and most
controversial of f1elds-child endow-
ment.
All the way from old-age pensions
and maternity allowances through COM
pusory arbitration of labor disputes.
minimum wage fixed by law and a
44-hour working week. to government
grants to private individuals for the
building of homes. Australia has within
the past quarter of a century attempted
to exemplify the slogan:
Few millionaires. but no poverty"
The schemes for bettering its society
have gone on apace and unchecked.
though many of the above e-mentioned
enterprises dropped into the red ink
from the very beginning and were ul-
timately written off the books by a
disillusioned people as dismal failures.
The vital urge for an ideal, however.
persists, and today as the controversy
over child endowment in Australia
RACES even more heatedly after two
years of active agitation, the persistence
and breadth of the discussion of this
many-sided question is little short OF
amazing.
Begun by Women.
In 1926, while a Labor government
was in control in New South Wales,
the women with outstanding unanlmlty
began a movement for the endowment
of children of the state. They drew
up a "Childrens Charter" which con-
tanned an irreducible minimum OF the
physical, educative and moral needs OF
the child. It was a detailed document
and overlooked nothing-in fact, 1t even
provided that "1s cd for rabbit, brains
and fish" should be spent each week
for every youngsters diet.
The women won, and on September
/, 1927, child endowment payments
began. The law provided (a) for the
declaration of a basic wage for a man
and wife. and (b) the payment OF an
allowance of 81 25 per week in respect
of each dependent child, subject to the
provision that child allowance shall only
be paid to the extent by which
workers total earnings fall short OF the
sum represented by the basic wage plus
child allowance at the rate OF Sl.25 per
week for each child. Thus a worker
with three dependent children receiv-
ing S25 by way of salary would not be
entitled to the allowance, but would
receive it in respect of a fourth child.
The fund from which these payments
are being made was created by a tax OF
3 per cent on the pay roll OF employers,
with rebate of 10 per cent in respect
of workers whose wages are fixed under
awards of the Federal Court OF Arbl.
tration. The basic wage was declared
at approximately $21.25 per week for
adult males, S115O per week for adult
females and at $21 for rural employees.
Modest Living Cost.
In view of the fact that the cost of
living in Australia can generally be
stated to be about half of what 1t Is in
the United States. the victory won IN
terms of dollars and cents was consld-
cradle. However, New South Wales
shunted the problem into the domain
of national affairs, for no sooner was
the child endowment law passed than
the cry was raised that other states
would begin a competition with New
South Wales in providing more liberal
endowment schemes to attract popula-
ton, thus adversely affecting industry
that depended on a stable labor supply.
Accordingly. at a conference OF state
premiers held in Melbourne year ago
it was decided to appoint royal COM
mission to inquire into the entire ques-
ton. and the hearings before this COM
mission have produced an astounding
wealth of thought This Is said advis-
ordered before it the very best brains OF
the commonwealth, but by carefully de-
limiting the scope of its inquiry it has
avoided diffusion in testimony.
The feeling aroused has been so great
that the discussion is far from being
confined merely to the parquet OF the
commission. Private bodies are holding
public debates-and these are crowded.
Recently the Australian Natives Asso-
citation thrashed out the question That
legislation should be introduced provid-
ing for scheme of child endowment
operating throughout the common
wealth."
Arguments pro were that child endow-
ment would stimulate the birth rate
and should make for increased virility,
tality statistics. The endowment would
be recognition of the rights of the
child, which was the greatest asset of
any country. Those opposing the
scheme claimed that there was no need
for child endowment in Australia, where
the amount earned by workers was
more than sufficient to provide for the
wants of the home. Statistics showed
that though the Federal minimum wage
provided for family of five. the aver
age size of Australian families was
limited to two. Any scheme which
robbed the worker of the incentive to
better himself and provide for the re-
sponsibilities of married life would not
be acceptable in Australia. The scheme
would have to be financed by taxation.
which would increase the burden on In
dustries which we're already overtaxed.
Backed by Labor.
Naturally, the forces of labor ap-
peared before the royal commission to
support the movement for child en-
doWment The striking feature of the
testimony adduced by G. Crofts secre-
tary of the Australian Council of Trade
Unions, is the insistence that endow-
ment is natural right" of the child.
He was little interested in the technical
problems of application. To him 1t was
all matter of vital principle. He said:
Child endowment is imperative II
Australia is to be assured in the future
of a healthy, we'll educated. efficient,
and service-giving population.
The project should be entirely inde-
pendent of wages and should have no
relation whatever to the wage system.
Many children, 1t is considered, would
be left unprovided for If the matter
were bound up with the question of
wages. Wages, the council claims, are
a charge upon industry and child en-
dowment is a social obligation on the
nation. Certain producing industries
naturally would be called upon to bear
the greater portion of the financial bur-
den, If not all the cost, of any endow-
ment proposal based on wages paid.
This endowment should be applicable to
all children and the necessary funds
should be drawn from general revenue"
Opposed by Employers.