he sixty-five millions could be made to earn even
larger dividends than do the funds in stocks and bonds. Let the Big
Three offer the use of their big cash balances by public
competition--under the most conservative conditions that can be
prescribed. Instantly the net returns will double.

All insurance policy-holders are familiar with the specious circulars
and letters presenting statements of business done and investments made,
which are sent out from the head offices of the great companies at odd
intervals on the plea: "We want our policy-holders to know everything we
are doing at all times." The public is assured at other intervals that
there can be no secret or inside deals in the affairs of insurance
companies because of the close examinations they are subjected to by the
Insurance Departments of the various States. The insurance officials
say: "All our facts and figures are vouched for by so many different
sets of auditors and State Departments that they must be exact truths."
To what extent is the public actually safeguarded by these
investigations?

Some months ago I called attention to the fact that the directors of the
New York Life Insurance Company had sold to themselves the stock of the
New York Security & Trust Company at from three to four millions less
than the property would have commanded from outsiders. Here is another
transaction which requires explanation:

In 1901, ostensibly in order to maintain its position in the German
states--I will explain later on what I mean by "ostensibly"--the
insurance company disposed of its remaining holdings of stocks, the same
having a book value of $2,965,000 and a market value of $5,471,000, as
per report of 1900. These stocks, with possibly sales of some other
securities, realized an actual profit of $5,839,087 instead of
$3,075,392 as per the company's _sworn_ report to the several State
Insurance Departments.

Rather a queer proceeding, you say. Why should it do such a thing? Had
some one stolen the extra profit? Or what? This is what was done: The
company had simply availed itself of the opportunity to conceal an
actual cash profit of $2,763,715 in order that it might sequestrate
assets to that amount unnoticed by its policy-holders or the
departments. The sum so sequestrated was made up of balances due from
agents--presumed, as in all such cases, to be amply secured by pledge of
renewal contracts--to the amount of $1,919,734, and $843,891 charged off
dep