FRIENDLY SOCIETIES. The uncertainties of human life and health, and the effects of these on the well-being of those who are dependent for their subsistence on human labor, are too manifest not to have arrested the attention of men in all ages, and to have taxed their ingenuity to guard against them. It is probable, therefore, that traces of some sort of institution, corresponding more or less closely to the F. S. of modern Europe, might be found wherever mankind have not depended for their means of living on the spontaneous products of the soil. At all events, they had their prototypes iu the cases, boxes, and chests, or kists—as they were called in Scotland and Germany— of the guilds and corporations of rnedimval Europe; which were funds not only for maintaining the dignity and ministering to the conviviality of the members, but foi providing for the aged and the sick. Mr. Turner finds them in Anglo-Saxon England, and, like the other institutions connected with municipal life, they probably formed part of the legacy of the Romans to the Teutonic conquerors of Europe. F. S. are a form of mutual insurance, and, like all insurances, they depend on the principle of sub stituting the certainty which attends the fortunes of large numbers of men for the uncer tainty which belongs to the fortune of each. Their main objects are the securing, in virtue of a small periodical payment during health and vigor, of a weekly sum during sickness, a sum to cover funeral expenses at death, and sometimes of. a pension after a certain age. In some respects, therefore, joining a friendly society is better than becom• ing a depositor in a savings-bank. Sickness may come before the savings are consider able; or, if considerable, they may be melted away by a long-continued sickness; but after the first weekly payment is made to a friendly society, the member is secure of succor, at least for a time, and he has, perhaps, other advantages. It is possible, on the other hand, that a difficulty may be experienced, in certain circumstances, in keep ing up the weekly or other periodical payments required, and in this case, in most soci• eties, he altogether forfeits the expected benefits.
It is to be regretted that, of this excellent class of institutions, many are founded upon erroneous principles, or rather upon no principles at all; and it often happens, therefore, that those who trust to them are disappointed, the funds falling short before all claims are satisfied. This was atone time not to be wondered at, as no proper cal
culations for F. S. existed; but such is no longer the case, sound calculations being now attainable. The most.important observations on the average amount of sickness inci dent to human life are those made by the Highland society, Mr. Charles Ansell, Mr. Finlaison on behalf of the government, Mr. F. G. P. Neison, and the Manchester unity of odd-fellows. The first two were formed on data too limited to be of much value% those of the government were rendered practically worthless by an arbitrary definition of sickness, which made them uncertain for youth and maturity, and deprived them of all authority in reference to old age. The calculations of Mr. Nelson and the odd-fel lows are based on by far the greatest number of cases, and though investigated by the former in relation to the five years ending 1840, and by the latter in relation to a period precisely twenty years later, they corroborate each other almost completely. We give the estimate arrived at by Mr. Nelson of " sickness experienced in weeks in passing through different periods of life:" 20 to 30. 8.7; 30 to 40, 9.9: 40 to 50, 14.8; 50 to 60, 27.1; 60 to 65, 26.6; 65 to 70, 50.7; 70 to 75, 84.9; 75 to 80, 120.5.
One great mistake in the formation of F. S. is to assume that each member should pay an equal sum, whatever his age may be. This is unjust to the younger •members, who are less likely to become burdensome to the funds than the middle-aged; and, indeed, there is a riging'scalo of probability of sickness throughout all the years of a man's life. It is, however, well to retheraber that as sickness varies more considerably than mortality with the 'salubrity of the localities inhabited and the occupations of the members, no absolute reliance can be placed on published averages. All of them, how ever, agree in this, that increase of years is attended by increased,lial>ility to sickness. Now, a rightly constituted friendly society is bound to take this circumstance into account. To admit all ages at an equal payment, is clearly making the younger members pay for the elder.