attered a
constituency. In other words, the managers of companies which have
retained in the hands of the stock-holders all the powers of the
corporation think that those powers are more safely exercised by that
small body than they would be if participated in by all the holders of
policies. It may be doubted, however, whether a constituency small in
number and capable of manipulation, and their votes of concentration
into the hands of a few men, is the safest body to manage a corporation
whose chief business is the care of the accumulations arising from the
trust imposed upon the corporation by the contract of life insurance.
The power of wielding a mass of capital amounting to many millions of
dollars is an enormous power, and it should be reposed only in a body
which should be responsible for the careful, honest administration of
the trust, at stated intervals, to the persons most interested--that
is, to the policy-holders--the owners of the trust fund. One of the
chief characteristics of English companies is, that at the annual
meeting of the interested persons a full statement of the affairs of
the company is laid before the meeting, and an opportunity offered of
critical examination and comment. Discontent is thus allowed a safety
valve to express itself through, and the managers an opportunity of
explaining their action and accounting for their conduct. Public
opinion--the public opinion of the persons interested--is allowed a
chance of expression, and all misunderstandings and misconceptions an
opportunity for examination and refutation. The right to interrogate
the managers, and ask and obtain information as to the business at such
regularly recurring intervals, is an inestimable one. It can hardly be
conceived possible that great abuses could grow up if such a right
existed; but at any rate it is apparent that the probability of such
abuses is lessened to a great extent.

But this English practice is not known among us. In life insurance
affairs we have nothing remotely approaching it. It seems to have been
the policy of our companies to restrict participation in their
management to the smallest possible number, to avoid opportunities for
questioning or explanation, and to shroud the business in the deepest
mystery.

The officers of companies responsible for this policy justify
themselves upon the broad ground that they know better what is good for
the policy-holders than they do themselves. In the light of