Annals, Anecdotes and Legends: A Chronicle of Life AssuranceFrancis, John, of the Bank of England
History
Annals, Anecdotes and Legends: A Chronicle of Life Assurance
Francis, John, of the Bank of England
Life insurance
If it be thought that life assurance offices should, for the sake of
the public and of themselves, be interfered with by Government, the
next step is to discover the simplest and the least vexatious mode of
dealing with them. And here at once arises the question whether some
difference should not be made between the mutual and the proprietary
company. Assuming that the mutual system possesses every essential
element of safety, it is equally true that there are hazards in the
path of any company depending merely on its premiums, which do not
attend a company with a respectable proprietary. Hundreds were once
ruined by a mutual fire-company; and had the cholera, in 1849, fallen
on the class which does insure as much as on that which does not
insure, none can say to what extent the new and untried companies would
have suffered, or whether they could have paid the policies which
became due. And there is another point which materially affects an
office with a small business. In the first few years of its existence
the estimated mortality will probably ensue. But let us imagine,
for a moment, this mortality seizing those who are insured for large
amounts, instead of those who are insured for small sums; might not the
demands be too great for its capital, even with no excess of mortality,
especially when it is remembered that the expenses of establishing
the society would necessarily have decreased its resources? A company
with a subscribed and paid-up capital may fairly pay largely for
advertisements; but a mutual company, without any independent funds,
has scarcely the right to use their premiums for any other purpose
than to decrease the annual payments or add to the policies. As mutual
offices, therefore, have no other security than their premiums, these
would require to be looked after more circumspectly and closely than
where a capital and a proprietary are answerable to the insured. The
mode in which the funds are invested by mutual offices might be a fair
subject for publication; nor would this be an invidious distinction,
as an irresponsible office has less claim to an equal latitude of
investment, and less right to keep their secrets than a responsible
company.
One element in the success which the old mutual offices have
experienced is attributable to the high rates they charge. Thus, the
premium of an old mutual company at the age of thirty is 2_l._ 13_s._
6_d._; while that of an old proprietary company is 2_l._ 2_s._ There
may be an ultimate equivalent to the mutual insurer, if he live, in
either a reduced premium or an increased policy; but as the former
is too frequently accepted instead of the latter, the family of the
insured do not receive the same benefit at his death which they would
have done, had he paid the same sum to a proprietary office, and kept
up the premiums as he would have been compelled to do.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account