The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-08 00:00:00

properly; but leave the people to us, and we will do it all
for them in the proper manner." I demur to that. (Hear.)
I may now give the house some particulars of an extinct
society—one of the 57 victims of time and circumstances
which are winding up in the Court of Chancery—l mean
the British Provident. The British Provident Society was
founded in ISSI, and carried on business for 11 years. In
only three of these years did it register its accounts as re-
quired by law. These years were from '53 to '56. The
income of the society for those three years was £10,600,
and the expenses were £15,700. (Ironical cheers ) Perhaps
it may be a matter of interest to the house to know that
Mr. Ansell, one of our most eminent authorities, states of
a number of societies that their expenses during the five
years of their existence were 13 per cent, of the receipts,
However, in the case of the British Provident, the expenses
were rather more than 130 per cent. (Great laughter.)
Of course it was necessary that the society should be
brought to book, It went into Chancery in 1862, and an
action was brought for interpolating words in a deed, and
altering its character, after execution. The deed purported
to be sale to the manager, and the words interpolated made
'it a sale to the manager on behalf of the society, and
thereby made the vendor still liable for the outstanding
calls on the policy. The case was referred to a jury in
Chancery, and the jury, having consulted a short time,
were unanimously of opinion that the two interlineations
were made after the execution of the document. With that
verdict the Vice-Chancellor said he saw no reason to be
dissatified. The house will at once appreciate why lam
anxious that it should bo understood that I state these
things on the authority of public records, when I state that
the name of the manager of this society was John Sheridan,
and that, the name of Henry Brinsley Sheridan appeared
in the advertisement for 1856 as auditor, and in 1859 as
trustee of the society. That I believe is the name of the
hon. member for Dudley, but whether he is the gentle-
man referred to in the advertisement I do not know.
Doubtless ho will be able to make the most satisfactory
explanations upon the matter. I come now to the last part
of this painful portion of my business—the composition and
action of certain friendly societies. These friendly societies
are no fewer than 20,000 so far as regards those that are
registered. Besides these there are a large number un-
registered, and these, I am told upon conjecture, will make
up the number to near 30,000, Since the first Friendly
Societies Act was passed, 8,000 or 9,000 of them have failed.
(Hear, hear.) And when I add that the number of these
societies belonged almost exclusively to the labouring
classes, I may leave the house to appreciate the full meaning
of these societies being unable to meet their engagements.
I would now call attention to what ale called lapsed policies.
Amongst the labouring classes an elderly man cannot in-
sure ; they insure while they are young. But it is a most
severe description of convenant which you make with him.
You preach to him the duty of prudence ; yet you make him
covenant for life, and then by the intermission of a single
quarterly payment, after having paid his premium for ten,
twenty, aye thirty years, you deprive him of the benefit of
the policy. (Cheers.) Well, are these fair terms with the
labouring man? (Renewed cheering.) I can only say they
are thought too severe for the higher classes. (Hear.) The
higher classes have generally about one-third of the value
of a policy repaid to them by a sale to the company of the
policy. But no such concession is made in the case of the
industrious classes. And how is it possible for a labouring
man to answer for pad hag every week or every quarter
throughout his life the premiums that may be due from him ?
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear,") How is ho to be guaranteed
against vicissitudes? (Cheers.) Suppose any one of the
10,000 inevitable calamities to which the life of a poor man
is exposed befalls him; his policy lapses, and he loses every-
thing. It seems to me that that is a vet y harsh arrangement.
(Hear, hear.) We ought to desire to afford to the
labouring man some fairer prospect of insuring his life,
and consulting the distant exigencies of the future,
without incurring such fearful penalties. (Cheers.) Has
the house the least idea of the number of these lapsed poli-
cies ? To give two instances. The Friend in Need Society,
during five years, issued 86,000 policies, and 48,000 of these
lapsed. Tne Royal Liver last year issued 135,000 policies;
and the number lapsed during the same period was 70,000.
(Hear.) There is a notion that these societies which make
themselves so extraordinarily acceptable to the people are
self-governed bodies. I decline to give the smallest value
to that allegation. It is a perfect mockery to tell these
thousands upon thousands of shareholders scattered all
over England that they might have come up to an office
in London and set everything right. (Hear.) lam ex-
ceedingly desirous not to be understood as making a gene-
ral assault upon friendly societies, Nothing can be more
satisfactory—nothing more congenial to the temper of Eng
lishmen—than to see the labouring classes associated to-
gether in the true and real spirit of self-government, to
provide for the exigencies of sickness and old age. (Hear.)
But what I am told is, that the rigid law of mathematics
bears hardly on these societies, and that the smallness of
the number of their members makes it impossible to equa-
lise their risk. Although their expenses are moderate,
their casualties are heavy, and so they often come to an
untimely end. Still I cherish the belief that there are many
such societies in the happy mean of being able to discharge
their duty, and at the same time to pay their way. (Hear.)
But, as we all know, it is exceedingly difficult to keep these
societies out of harm's way. How much of their funds
arc consumed in the public-house I (Hear, hear.) What
grievous oppression is practised upon the minority who ob-
ject to have their payments disposed of in that way, and
how much the tyranny of one division of the working classes
over the other is fostered and encouraged through such so-
cieties. (Cheers.) On Saturday evening a meeting was held
at Exeter Hall, to oppose any change in the law, at which con-
siderable uproar prevailed. Sir, the chairman of that meet-
ing was Mr. George Potter, the far-famed secretary of the
Trades Union. And is it not a principle of these trades unions
—which, if they are voluntary, aro in the highest sense legi-
timate—too frequently to coerce the minority? (Cheers.)
Therefore Mr. Potter was in his proper place on Saturday
night, for it is the business of these societies to coerce, often
the minority, and sometimes the majority, through the
medium of an artfully-constructed system. (Cheers.) I
will state the condition of two of these societies. One is the
"Legal Liverpool Friendly Society," which was enrolled in
1881. Its income was £10,130, and the real capital which
it accumulated during the 21 yetirs of its existence, accord-
ing tc its own printed statements, was £3,900. (Laughter.)
The second is the " Royal Liver," which is 14 years old.
Well, its income was £77,000; its expense of management
£36,ooo—(much laughter)—and its accumulated assets upon
an income of £77,000 amounted in 14 years to only £39,000.
(Derisive cheers.) And yet the manager of this society
came to me on Saturday to remonstrate against this bill, as
being a very hard interference with private enterprise.
(Much laughter,) But this gentleman hake rival plan to
recommend to us. He told us the Government should ap-
point actuaries to examine the rules, Sec., of all societies.
What ! appoint actuaries to examine the rules and accounts
of some 20,000 or 33,000 friendly societies I' Why, it could
occur only to a Ministry out of Bedlam to originate such a
proposal. (Loud laughter.) I urged what would be our
position if un:ortunately it should turn out that any of these
societies proved insolvent. Well, in that case these gentle-
men proposed to us to make them solvent. (Great
laughter.) But surely, if it was in our power to do that
with respect to theso societies, we ought not to stop
there; but whenever we saw a gentleman in society re-
duced to insolvency, we ought at once to come to his re-
lief, and protect him from the harsh and disagree-
able necessity of having recourse to the Bankruptcy
Court. (Renewed laughter.) The right hon. gentleman
then proceeded to deal with the suggestion that the bill
should be referred to a select committee; but he re-
jected the responsibility, and deprecated delay in such a
matter. He concluded—l area aware of no mode of pro-
ceeding, compared with that now submitted to tho house,
which is not fraught with ten times greater evil, and which
does not likewise involve additional mischief and delay. 1
make my appeal not to one party or to another. I entreat
hon. members, one and all, to take into their view the
serious nature of the mischief, and the consequences in-
volved; and I am quite sure they will not be prevented by
any sentiments of party or political feeling from giving their
careful consideration to this proposal, and from determining
in their own minds and hearts how the British Legislature
can best acquit itself of this important portion of its obliga-
tions to the great mass of the people of England.
Mr. 11. SHERIDAN remarked that the large assurance
offices were not indisposed to grant policies for sums under
£lOO, and declared that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had suppressed the information which had been put in his
possession on that subject. Ho (tfr. Sheridan) opposed the
bill, because he believed it would break up and destroy
some 20,000 friendly societies, whilst it would entail an
enormous loss upon the country, which would have to
make up the deficiency that must inevitably result from so
unwise an interference with private enterprise.
Lord STANLEY aoproved of the bill, and therefore
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give the house
time to consider it in detail. The right hon. gentleman
had made statements which, however true they might
be, did nevertheless very seriously inculpate the manage-
ment of a great number of public bodies. He was not
standing there to speak on their behalf, but he thought
they had a right to fair play, and those who had an
answer to give would desire an answer in that house,
and would have no time to give it except when that bill
was under discussion. He sincerely hoped, therefore,
they would not come to a division upon a mere question
of time, and so create out of doors a very false impres-
sion as to the feeling and temper of that house. He
was not inclined to attach much importance to the
vested rights of insurance offices. He thought on the
point the Government had made out a good case, but he did
feel same doubt as to the prospect of this measure being
successful. Ho did not gather what was the perfect security
the right hon, gentleman intended to take against persona-
tion, and thought there would be seine difficulty in tracing
the identity of, for instance, a man named John Smith, a
mechanic, who might have been born in Glasgow, have
removed te Manchester, and died in London, and in whose
name the insurance money was claimed. Where there was
so large an amount of business it would be quite impossible
to have an effective medical supervision ; and ho did not
think that the employment and habits of a man's life were
material things to judge from, He was glad to hear the
right hon. gentleman disclaim any intention of placing any
liability on the Treasury. It did so happen that insurance
companies did break up ; and though ho hoped no such
thing would iIaPPQ4 in thQ CingrilLuellt 113411,raLICO of Oe,