The Sun.
London, England, 1856-08-06 00:00:00

LONDON LIFE ASSOCIATION.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir,—On my return to town this morning my atten-
tion has been called to a letter inserted in your City
Article of Saturday relative to the London Life Associ-
ation, in which the writer charges thpse who are propos-
ing to divide a part of the accumulated profits with en-
deavouring to evade their liabilities.
As I had the honour to move the resolution which has
been carried at two successive general meetings of the
association, you will, I am sure, allow me to correct the
error of your correspondent as to the effect of this reso-
lution, and absolve the majority who voted for it from
the charge of repudiation, when I explain to you that
the London Life Association, formed upo❑ the avowed
principle of mutual insurance, and of applying all profits
yearly to the reduction of the annual premiums, has,
in consequence of that principle not having been effec-
tually carried out, become possessed of an accumu-
lated capital arising from overpayments in the members'
premiums chiefly within the last 30 years, to the extent
of between 400,0001. and 500,000/. Of this accumu-
lation the directors proposed to divide 230,0001., but
their mode of division was in the way of reduction of
the future premiums, so as to give to the younger mem•
hers the greater part of it.

•
The accumulation having been formed by the over.
payment in past premiums, it ought on division to be
given back on the amount of past premiums paid by
each member. This is the object of the resolution your
correspondent decries. The equity of it is, however,
vo manifest that it is not necessary to say a word in
its defence.

Your correspondent contends that these accumulations
were pledged to the reduction of future premiums. But
no such pledge was ever given. I read to the meeting
the prospectuses to which your correspondent refers,
and they manifestly contained no such pledge ; but, on
the contrary, distinctly state that the premium paid by
each member for the first seven years furnishes the
means of reduction for the remainder of life, the tables
being, in fact, so calculated as to afford at least 60 per
cent. reduction after the first seven years. This your
correspondent and every other member in his circum-
stances will receive, and every pledge of the company
be fully redeemed. But it would be monstrous to assert
that the portion of accumulations which are all agreed
upon dividing, should be distributed in such a ratio that
those who have contributed the least to its formation
ould receive the greater part in its distribution.
I have the honour to be, sir,
Yours very faithfully,
ROBERT BAXTER.

August 5.

(From the Times City Article.)
A. variety of letters have been received in answer to
the protest of a correspondent published on Saturday
against the resolution adopted by a majority of the
shareholders of the London Life Association for a dis-
tribution of 230,000/. out of their surplus assets, and
which is to be settled by ballot ou the 13th inst. The
present writers all deny most emphatically that the pro-
posed distribution would involve a breach of engage-
ment with any of the policy holders, and contend that,
fortified as they are by the opinions of counsel upon a
fair statement of the entire case, they may at least be
allowed to entertain this view without being accused of
a disposition to practise repudiation. The simple ques-
tion is—Will the fulfilment of the promises held out to
new members be in any way jeopardised by the con-
templated act? This would seem easily to admit of an
answer, but the most contradictory statements respectingit are put forward, and the prospeet of obtaining a con-
cise and unprejudiced exposition appears hopeless.
Under the circumstances a reference, not necessarily in
a hostile spirit, to the Court of
.Chancery would decide
the point in the manner most satisfactory to all parties,
and it would be fair that the expense should be defrayed
from the funds of the association.