National Republican., 1876-09-09
Life Insurance in Massachusetts,.


We presented in our columns some days ago
a general review of the recently issued Massa-
chusetts Life Insurance Report. 1t has oc-
CURED to us that somewhat more particular
reference to this important document may not
be amiss. So long as three or four millions of
our people, at least, are directly and person
ally interested in life insurance and the proper
administration and solvency of life companies,
the subject cannot be ruled out of the range of
newspaper topics.
In looking over the report in question we
are struck with the standstill record of Massa-
chusetts companies, as compared with the
progress and growth of representative New
York Offices of the same or less age. The Old
Bay State has six life companies, Organized at
the following dates: Massachusetts Hospital,
1923; New England Mutual, 1874; State
Mutual, 1S45; Massachusetts, Mutual, 1851;
Berkshire, 1851; John Hancock, 1862. These
six companies report gross assets aggregating
S29 ,097 500; gross income in 1875, SO, ,621 1SS;
surplus as regards policy holders, IS, ,57S, ,224.
And this is the total result of $50 years of life
management If we take that practical view OF
the matter. One of the companies, the Mas
sachusetts Hospital, however, is only the mere
shadow Of life office, having long ago ceased
from its labors, and now having only six pol
icies and SIS, 500 insurance in force. Omitting
this company from the account will not greatly
vary the figures above given, but will simplify
art, facilitate fair comparison such as we
wish to make. The five remaining offices have
averaged an existence of twenty-five years
each, and yet New York can show a company
only seventeen years old whose figures are In
all material respects at least equal to those of
all its elder sisters in Massachusetts, put to-
gether. For example:
Gross assets
Five Mas.a chm sa,ts connania, sos 10 81
Gross income
Five Massachusetts companies. Ss,45o,ss1
Equitable, Of New York.............. $50
Five Massachusetts companies sl2s, OH 2ll
Equitable, Of New York. I7s,6S2os6
When we come to push this comparison
further, so as to include New York companies
of equal age with those of Massachusetts, we
find equally notable examples of progressive
management. The great Mutual for instance,
is only one year older than the New England
Mutual; yet the assets of the two are S7S, ,534,-
076 and S14 ,S57 ,S29 respectively. And between
other offices OF equal age In the two States the
same relative disparity obtains. 1t is case of
ultra conservatism on the one hand and ra-
tional progress on the other.
In the matter of business done on Massachu-
setts soil, even the home companies manifest
disposition to allow their own citizens to look
outside the State for life insurance rather than
the field. Out Of the SIS, ,260, ,266 insured on
lives in Massachusetts last year, other State
companies wrote S15 ,333 ,34S, or 81 per cent,of
the whole. The Mutual and Equitable alone !
wrote 81 ,6S3 ,591, as against the 81 926 91S se-
cured by the five Massachusetts, companies.
If we add the business of the Continental Life
to that of the Equitable and the Mutual, we
find that the three foreigners" overpassed the
five "natiyes" nearly 81 ,0O0, 900 in business se-
cured in that State last wear
1t doesn't follow, by any means, from all
this, that the people of Massachusetts lack
confidence in their own life companies, for this
would be an absurdity, since the Massschu-
setts offices are all good enough for their con-
tracts. But the fact would seem to be that
the lack of confidence is just the other way.
The companies act as if they didn't believe in
themselves, or the people close around them
psnies can do, home companies, with nom
forfeiture law to help them, ought to be able
to do much easier. Nevertheless, the unpro-
gressive Massachusetts, Offices appear to be
willing to let companies from New York and
other States come into their peculiar field and
reap the harvest, while themselves are content
to follow and merely CLEAN.
or course, 1t is calculated to crafty our
local pride to know that New York has q life
insurance company which, in seventeen years,
can exhibit as much assets, with as unques-
toned solvency, as the whole family of Mass4-
chusetts companies put together can show for
twenty five years work in the life field. But
the difference all lies in management; and, If
our Bay State friends won't push on, such
wide-awake managers as those of the Mutual
and Equitable companies cannot be expected
to wait for them.-Ns1c York Evening Nail,
du0uSf 25