are determined by the Proctors for the Dioceses almost invariably, because of the Deans and of those who hold official position, a great many never attend by any chance, and others very seldom attend. The Archdeacons may be regarded as officials, but a great many of them are parochial clergy, and in this vote I believe that we entirely represented the parochial clergy.'

The necessity for the compulsory clause from an actuarial point of view was given by Mr. Cornelius Walford :

'I consider the compulsory clause necessary for the financial success of the scheme, for this reason, that you must get the business without the expense of canvassing for it. You could not conduct a class business, that is to say, a limited business in itself, at the rates proposed in the schedule, in my judgment, unless the business came to you without searching for it, that is to say, without the paid agency necessary to bring it. I think if the State compels the clergy to insure, the clergy are right in endeavouring to devise a scheme by which they can insure at the smallest cost.'

We now come to another department of the evidence, namely the actuarial, which includes the questions of the financial soundness of the scheme, the possibility of the shilling premium and the principle of what was termed the creation of a monopoly.

Mr. Tomkinson, the chairman of the committee of the Insurance Offices, and formerly the principal officer of the Sun Fire Office, described the position taken up by the Fire Offices with regard to the Bill. The committee of which he was chairman, he said, consisted of representatives of rather more than fifty Companies, which co-operated in certain matters of rates for classes of risks (not all risks), and generally on other matters which were deemed to be of common interest to the Fire Insurance profession. They were the 'Tariff' Companies. He should think altogether there would be a large amount of business in their associated offices affected by the Bill; all the business affected by the Bill would probably be removed from existing offices.

Mr. Cornelius Walford explained that the 'Tariff' Offices are an association of Fire Assurance Offices, which agree not to insure risks of a certain defined class for less than a minimum defined premium. The non-Tariff' Offices are simply those which are not bound by any such regulations. Nine out of ten of the Insurance Offices are Tariff Offices. It is unquestionably a commercial trade combination. The charge of monopoly has frequently been brought against Insurance Offices.

"Mr. Tomkinson.-Speaking from a Fire Insurance point of view,

I would submit that the Fire Insurance Offices object to the Bill as creating a monopoly in that portion of the Bill which is proposed to be compulsory, and then on the basis of the business so created to transact general competitive business; the second class of business being brought in to support the monopoly business. There are two classes of business, the one monopoly, the other competitive, and while the two together form a mass of business which Fire Insurance experience regards as being of too small an area to be prudently conducted, either of the two would alone, à fortiori, be a very hazardous business to undertake, owing partly to the limited area, and, secondly, to the question of expenses, which bear a large proportion to a small business.

'The Chairman.-Are you aware of how many risks are likely to be available under the compulsory clause?

Mr. Tomkinson.-Not at all. I have no means of judging. 'The Chairman.—I understand you to be distinctly of opinion that the rate of premium of Is. per cent. on first-class risks under this Bill is insufficient?

'Mr. Tomkinson.-I should certainly feel very great doubt about it, even if the whole business contemplated by the Bill were brought within their scope.

'The Chairman.-At the same time, as you have no knowledge of the details of the business which would come under the control of the Bounty Board, your opinion is rather a general one, from a general knowledge of the nature of Insurance business, than one formed upon any figures upon which you have based your calculations. 'Mr. Tomkinson.-Certainly. I have no means of taking actual figures.'

Mr. Aston, the Secretary of the Bounty Board, said :—

'One Fire Insurance Office has already made an overture to take the business contemplated in this Bill at Is. per cent., and another at Is. Id. per cent. Those offices have been charging the clergy hitherto Is. 6d. per cent. on ordinary risks, and 2s. and 2s. 6d. on other risks.'

Mr. Dudgeon, the Agent of the County Fire Office, said :—

'Every church and every glebe house vested in the Church body of Ireland is insured in one lump in the County Fire Office. The rate of premium is Is. 6d., reduced by returns to an annual premium of only Is. per cent. The annual premiums amount to 1,000, the annual losses to 20%. I do not at all dispute the possibility of the insurance being done at Is. per cent., because I propose to do it myself.'

Mr. Plummer, the Secretary of the Wesleyan Methodist Insurance Company, gave evidence with regard to the experience of that Society :

'The Wesleyan Methodist Trust Assurance Company insures the chapels, schools, and ministers' houses of the Wesleyan connexion,

together with the furniture in the ministers' houses. We take no other business. The office has been in existence six years. The premiums have paid all the losses and all the expenses, and we have accumulated a fund of 7,000l. As far as we can ascertain we can make now an average annual profit of 2,000l. We deal with the surplus in the interests of the Connexion. We have at present 4,500 distinct properties insured with us. We do not retain more than 3,000l. on any individual risk. About 30 per cent. of our policies exceed 2,000l. I should think. Our experience goes to prove that we have an abundantly large enough area to work upon. Our losses during five years have been 20l. per cent. of the premiums. The risks are first-class risks, from an Insurance point of view ; there may be exceptions among them, but taking them all round, they are first

class.

'Mr. Cornelius Walford.-Supposing the Bill to pass and the insurance of these houses were compulsory, and supposing also that the basis upon which the calculation was made were a satisfactory one, there would be no risk whatever in Queen Anne's Bounty Board advancing money for first losses, supposing that such advances depended for being recouped upon the accumulation of premiums. I do not think, if the scheme be well worked, that Queen Anne's Bounty Board will run any risk in standing godfather to the system. I am of opinion that in three years the fund accumulated would be sufficient to meet all engagements arising upon it. It is a perfectly safe investment for the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty Board to invest their money in at a fair percentage. Assuming the business is conducted with skill there may be said to be no risk. Taken as a whole, there is no class of property which is considered a better class risk than parsonage houses. They are special in their goodness, as others are special in their badness. I believe that I per cent. premium is abundantly sufficient, if care is taken in the acceptance of first-class risks. The County Office (which insures the Irish Church at is. per cent. premium) is of the first order. I am sure they would not take the parsonages at any rate, whatever it might be, unless they saw their way to make a profit out of the transaction. In the case proposed by the Bill the cost of management would be exceptionally small, because the cost of management in the ordinary way includes advertising to get business and agents' commission. Here there would be no advertising and no agents, so that there would be no 157. per cent. or 12 per cent. for agents' commission. Therefore, at least, half the expenses would be saved to start with. Again, the fact of not issuing policies and the diminished postage would lessen the cost to a considerable degree. There is at present a highly respectable office which is taking first-class risks at Is. per cent. ; that office is the National in Bridge Street, Blackfriars. The Wesleyan Methodist Trust Assurance I consider most distinctly to be financially sound. Supposing out of 10,000 parsonages 8,000 were under 1,000l. in value, 1,000 under 2,000l. in value, and 1,000 under 3,000l. in value, I should consider the conditions of the business very good and certain.'

On this portion of the subject the clerical evidence is not of course so valuable as the actuarial; it will, however, be interesting to read the following:

Canon Trevor thought that the ecclesiastical risk was not less than the average risk.

The Bishop of Chichester stated that there had been only one fire in the seven years of his episcopate in the 264 parsonages of his diocese; and that the late Bishop of Lichfield had told him that there had not been a single fire in his diocese during the whole ten years of his episcopate.

On the part the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty were called upon to play in carrying out the scheme, and the user of their funds, Canon Trevor objected to the employment of the funds in the way indicated by the Bill, and maintained further that even the present power to borrow from Queen Anne's Bounty for the purposes of building was a perversion of the bounty funds.

Mr. Rodwell.-You think there has been a legal misappropriation, so to speak, of the funds of the Bounty Board ever since they were diverted from their original purpose of augmenting small livings?

'Canon Trevor.-It was an innovation, and one which was open to considerable exception; so much so, that the Secretary of the Board said they wanted a bill of indemnity.

Mr. Rodwell.-Has that innovation been attended with very great advantage to a great many clergy in building their new parsonages?

"Canon Trevor.-Certainly. I said so.

'Mr. Birley.-I want to know how the poorer clergy are prejudiced if the money which is to augment their livings is received in the way of interest upon loans to the beneficed clergy; if they are getting 3 per cent. from these loans, how much more would they get if the money were invested in consols?

"Canon Trevor.-Nothing more in that way; but if the money were invested in land it would produce a great deal more.'

On the same subject Mr. Gibbs and the Bishop of Chichester took quite another view.

'Mr. Gibbs.-Recognising that the whole object of Queen Anne's Bounty is the relief of small livings, I think that the application of their funds in the direction of a cheap insurance would be for the benefit of the incumbents of small livings, and, therefore, in accordance with the spirit of the original constitution. It is certainly a benefit to them to insure their houses at a low rate, and it is a very good appropriation of the money in the hands of the Governors, provided no loss were ultimately sustained. I do not see that the Bill will convert Queen Anne's Bounty Board into a trading company, or that the insurance of parsonages is a speculative business.

The Bishop of Chichester.-I think the value of the saving would be greater to the incumbents of small livings, and that, in that case, it is quite a benevolent application of the Bounty fund, and that it would be so far carrying out the objects of the Bounty Board.'

Among the minor points which excited attention and caused much misapprehension, was the exclusion of the Bishops' palaces from the compulsory operation of the Bill.

'Canon Trevor.-Another thing which the clergy feel very strongly is, that this Bill exempts the bishops. We resent that very much; if it is good for us, it is good for the bishops; if it is good for the bishops to exercise an independent judgment, it is good for us to exercise it upon our individual property.

'The Chairman.-Have you at all thought whether the value of the bishops' palaces has not influenced the framers of this measure to exclude them from the operation of this Bill; I mean in this way, that the greater the value of the risks insured, supposing they are few in number, the more uncertain is the scheme for both?

'Canon Trevor.-No. I had not thought of that. I did not know that there was any other reason for it, except that the bishops, being in Parliament, would probably have obstructed the Bill, if it had been compulsory upon them.

'Mr. Stanley Leighton.-But if you had been told that the reason for their omission was not clerical but was commercial, and that the value of the bishops' palaces was so much larger than that of the ordinary parsonages that, if included in the compulsory part of the Bill, they would have upset the averages; that would remove your objection, would it not?

• Canon Trevor.-If I were told so by a competent actuary, but not if I were told so by two or three dignitaries who had been told something by somebody else which they cannot prove.

Mr. Tomkinson.-There is a commercial reason for excluding bishops' palaces from the compulsory operation of the Bill. It certainly would not be safe to take twenty-five risks of 10,000l. in value each.

'Mr. Cornelius Walford.-Any business based upon risks ranging, say, from 400l. to 800l., is a perfectly safe business; if you have a thousand risks of that sort your business will be perfectly safe ; but if you have amongst those risks a smaller number of risks of a very much higher amount in value, you will have no average of your larger risks; you will have an average of the small risks; they make their own average by their numbers; but the average of the larger risks does not arise; you must have, in order to make an average, say, at least, a thousand risks; that is to say, if you take the 5,000l. line, you should have a thousand risks of 5,000l. to make an average. It will be seen that just in proportion as the sum is large which may be lost in one risk, you must have a corresponding number of the same risk to produce the average in that class.'

We next refer to the objections with regard to the details,