WCP539

[1]¹

54 Fairfield Road

Edmonton

Middlesex

20/1/[19]13

Dear Sir

I congratulate you very much on your 90^th birthday and hope you will see many more of them[.] When you have finished your book on the Labour party, will you be kind enough to send me a P.C. with price as I should very much like one. As regards myself I do not believe either the Liberal or Conservative party. In Daily Chronicle Jan[uary]. 14 1913, on the Insurance Act ^{you wrote} the Act was a temporary palliative, might lower wages or increase [sic] prices ect [sic]-yet in same paper Jan[uary]. 25 1912 in an article by you, you said it was the greatest end most beneficial of all attempts yet made, ect. "That only the better paid among the skilled labourers who will pay the full contribution of 3^d per week" should have read 4^d)[.] Now sir, the question I should like to know is have you altered your opinion on the low wages question, or has

this paper printed it wrong, as I myself have been misrepresented by a Lib[eral] and Con[servative] paper on this subject (they both left the content out) you would have been right sir, if a casual came under the same class as those people who earn 9/- or under per week or 1/6 per day, but the trouble is, it is levied on the daily wage, not the weekly wages. If a man earns only 1/6 for one day in the week, he is stopped 4^d[.] I know a case: a poor woman earnt only 10^d yet she was stopped 3^d, a youth earnt only 4^d1/2, one hours work on the week, yet he had to pay the 4d. This is where the Act deals very harshly with the honest people[.] I have insured myself from age 17, yet my lodge only value my 4^d as 3^d I have to pay 3^d a week to get the benefits of the Act. This kind of thing is I believe the cause of the trouble about the Act[.] Thanking you in inticipation [sic] for a reply[.] I remain

Yours Truly | J. Jennings [signature]

To Dr Russel Wallace O.M. F.R.S.