The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-13 00:00:00

I involving the security of so many individuals,
we have always thought it adviszble to ex-

; plain to the proprietors annudly the ma nn
our operations fur the pr,:cedii:g.
.)b,0.. inis
.)e,ir
has been one certainly of considerable suffering,
i nevertheless the profits of this year are nearly double
the amount of that of last year.—(Hear, hear.)
Another drawback which we have had to contend
with
.is the expense to which we have been
put by the establishment of the agencies in
the United States referred to in the report,
which have fallen entirely upon this year. These
expenses are considerable, but the directors thought
it would be better, especially as the profits of the
society would allow it, to charge them upon
the current expenses of the year, instead of spread-
ing them over several years, as we did in the first
instance with respect to expenses of a like nature.
The preliminary expenses, in the first instance'
amounted altogether to 16,0001.; they have been
reduced to 9,0001., and in the course of a few years
they will become extinguished. What I particularly
wish to direct the attention of the proprietors to is
this, that every year we have an annual inves-
tigation of our affairs—(Hear, hear)—that is one
of the original principles of the constitution
of this society. Before this society was established
the old societies adopted the plan of making an in-
vestigation of their affairs, and submitting the results
to their proprietors only once in five, seven, or ten
years. We considered that question very fully, and
we thought that by distributing the surplus
bonus, if any, every year to the policy-
holders, and allowing each individual insured
in the society to participate in the annual profits,
they would derive far more advantage from such
arrangement than if the society had adopted the
plan to which I have referred, and had waited to the
end of ten years before they were distributed. In those
societies which make a distribution only once in ten
years, the consequence is that some lucky individual
may get a very large share of the bonus, whilst those
who died before the declaration of the bonus, obtained
in their lifetime no advantage, owing to the length
of time which elapsed between one period and another.
This objection cannot be made to this society,
as holders of policies have all the advantages
which are derived from an annual distribution. I
trust, therefore, that the advantage which the society
offers will be made known by this meeting, and that
it will induce those who are about to insure their
lives' to give a preference to this society. A more
equable division of the surplus profits is made, so that a
policy falling in during the year could only be deprived
of the bonus accruing between one annual meeting
and another.—(Hear, hear.) I wish also to refer to
the successful establishment of agencies in the
Canadas and in the United States. The result of
the experiment has been a source of great gratifica-
tion to the directors. We felt that the extension of
the society abroad was attended by difficulties, and,
therefore, we bad to exercise a great deal of caution ;
but as the principles on which the society is founded
had met with the most liberal support in this country,
we confidently believed that the same results would
attend it elsewhere, and we have not been mistaken,
as agencies have been established in the United
States; and we feel as much security in these agents
as if they were under our immediate control in
London.—(Hear.) There is another matter in which
I myself feel much gratified—as much gratified
as with any other part of our operations. The pro-
spectus of deferred annuities, early issued, embodied
the entire argument connected with friendly and
benefit societies. It pointed out the evils and
applied the remedy to the existing system. I had
made it for many years my peculiar study to trace the
exact nature of the evils inherent in these societies,
and in publishing the plan of this society I explained
my views of the subject, and I find that they have
been greatly. acquiesced in by those thinking
persons who have bestowed their attention upon
the subject. I said that the subscribers to those
benefit societies did not receive the benefit from them
which they professed to afford. It is now six or
seven years ago since the plan which I proposed to
remedy those evils was published, and since it re-
ceived, I may say, the sanction of the general public,
without, however, drawing towards it any great number
ofpersons belonging to the class to which I have referred.
Certainly we have a great number of deferred an-
nuitantstv:a eno rtoadl gd e to
ss
y;
the
sb
system,
which
mt
working
tho nme ys i
ad
yee
o cr considering
ss a
inet
so
said that
t p
atie
ht
in
ai
tet
was
general designedraan dto
a.
till
lto recentlyobtain underiythas
not received that attention and support fromth theml
of which it seems deserving. During
year the subject has been much discussed
by by the Benefit Societies in England. A committee,
composed of zealous members of Friendly So-
cieties, was formed. They had under consi-
deration every plan proposed, either by the Govern-
te
ment or by the various companies, for the purpose
of affording the working classes the best means of
providing for sickness and old age, and after this
society had requested the fullest investigation,
they came to a resolution, which they forwarded
to the board of directors, stating that, after the
fullest consideration of the merits of other systems,
they had come to the resolution that nothing was so
advantageous to the working man, or to the indus-
trious
classes in general, as the plan we had
promulgated.—(Cheers.) We had much difficulty
in convincing those societies that in fact subscriptions
for the purpose of creating a fund in sickness was a
waste of means; and that the sums thus contributed
might be much better and economically laid out ac-
cording to our system than by allowing it to be a
sickness fund. The deputation that waited upon
us upon the subject wished us at first to expunge
that portion of the prospectus which had reference
to this subject, the inutility of providing a sickness
fund, and after much discussion we intimated to
them that the suppression of this argument would
amount to a suppression of our principles, and that
we could not do so with advantage to the society-
- (Hear, hear)—but, as many of the working
classes are much in favour of a sickness fund, al-
though they are paying away money for a purpose
which affords few of the advantages which this
institution offers, the directors considered that
two modes of providing for old age and
sickness might co-exist, and in fact should exist—
namely, a sickness fund, entirely separate from the
annuity fund, as the result, too frequently, was
this—that a man found, in old age, that although
he had been a contributor to the general fund,
he was eventually deprived of that advantage which,
under abetter system, he might have enjoyed by con-
tributions from his labours, at a period in life when
he most stood in need of aid. I think, therefore, that
the tendency will be that these two departments must
be kept distinct. It was stated in the early part of the
establishment of this society, that our plan of de-
ferred annuities would destroy reunions. No such
thing. In fact, the constant reunion of the members of
friendly societies tends to promote the welfare of
the productive classes, to diffuse amongst them the
kindliest feelings, and sustain them when the rights
of labour are invaded, and I am much in favour of
them because I think they are for their advantage,
We have not brought into the business of this year any
portion of those policies that have come to us from
these classes. They are new insurers, and are a body
in fact who will require almost a separate establish-
ment, but when you consider that there are at least
between 3,000,000 and 4,000,000 connected with
these friendly societies—a very large class to deal
with—and sufficient, if they insure to any extent, to
pay the expense of a separate establishment, to regu-
late the receipts and expenditure in connexion with
that department. For instance, the Manchester
Unity of Oddfellows, one of the largest so-
cieties in the kingdom, has about two hundred and
fifty-one thousand members, and their revenue is about
316,0001. a year, but that is only one society. Ido
not wish to make any statement prejudicial to that
society, or to others of a similar nature, as I have no
desire to underrate the good which they unquestion-
ably eis effect, but
of odd fellows, lknow from the
eveaecrycounts published
yearconsiderable waste of means, which Isu shows a
suppose, ac•
cording to their system is inevitable. But I think
that the adoption of the proposal, we have submitted
to them, will greatly redound to their advantage
that their resources will be better economised,
and better and more profitably invested, than
by systems in force at present. I should
say, gentlemen, that I have never addressed a meet-
ing with more pleasure, with more pride, and