OCR Text |
Show LIFE INSURANCE SOUNDNESS. We have from President Paul Morton Mor-ton of the Equitable Assurance Society a long circular deploring the extent to which policy-holders allowed their policies to lapse. He contends that this was not only a sacrificing of their own interests by the policyholders, but that there were no reasons why they should at any time have doubted tho perfect solvency of the company, as the reforms re-forms Instituted will offset former extravagances. ex-travagances. In the major premise he Is quite right; It was a bad move to allow the policies to lapse. It s also quite true that there was no reason to doubt the solvency of his company, or of either of the other great companies which were under Investigation; but not for the reason which he states. For, no subsequent economies could make up for past waste and loot, If It were true that the companies collect from the, policy-holders no more than the necessities ne-cessities of safety and sound business policy require. It Is In fact because the companies have constantly collected from the policyholders more than safety and business prudence require, that they are solvont today. How, If this were not so, could tho life Insurance companies com-panies havo survived the loot of their resources by the hundreds of thousands thou-sands of dollars? How could companies com-panies which collect no more than they must collect In order to meet tho needful need-ful requirements of their business, survive sur-vive a carnival of loot, In high salaries, enormous political contributions, side companies heavily officered at princely salaries, enormous legal retainers which were simply bonuses for protection, protec-tion, legislative corruption funds, and a general scheme of extravagant expenditure ex-penditure that would, swamp any ordinary ordi-nary enterprise? It is only by conceding that more was taken and withheld from the policyholders pol-icyholders than was necessary, that tho companies were able to survive In sound condition. This Is too evident to need any argument. This Is the position posi-tion The Tribune haa taken throughout on this question; It has constantly proclaimed pro-claimed that the insurance companies were sound, and when directly asked by policyholders ouradvlce as to making ma-king good or forfeiting their policies, we havo emphatically and always said, make good, and hold on to your policies. poli-cies. And now, what Is to be the outcome? It Is admitted that there has been shameful extravagance; that the companies com-panies have 'been, ruthlessly pillaged by their officers, for the benefit of thensfiives, their relatives, their favorites, favor-ites, their tools, and their pet schemes 6r purposes. By collecting and withholding with-holding from the policyholders more than was Just, the companies were able to come out Intact from all the squandering; squan-dering; the raid on the policyholder' money did not distress the companies or In any way impair their financial soundness. With the coming In of the economical administration, and the reclaiming re-claiming of large sums that had been diverted but could yet be reclaimed, Ihc policyholders certainly ought to have a benefit, the old in a good round dividend, and the new iu lessened rates for policies. That Is the reform lhat Is really pointed to in. all this business. The question is. will It materialize? ma-terialize? j |