ment of its rules, to declare (in one or more of them) all and every the intents and purposes for which such society is intended to be established;' and 'direct all and every the uses and purposes to which the money which shall from time to time be subscribed, paid or given for the use or benefit of such society, or which shall arise therefrom, or in anywise belong to the same, shall be appropriated and applied; and in what shares or proportions, or under what circumstances, any member of such society, or other person, shall or may become entitled to the same, or in part thereof.' And the societies were empowered to inflict penalties for any diversion or misapplication of the funds. It was declared unlawful to dissolve or determine any such society, so long as the intents or purposes declared by such society, or any of them, remain to be carried into effect, without the consent and approbation of five-sixths of the then existing members of such society; and also of all persons then receiving, or then entitled to receive relief from such society, either on account of sickness, age, or infirmity, to be testified under their hands individually and respectively.' And it was further made unlawful for such society by any rule, order, or regulation, to direct the division or distribution of such stock or fund, or any part thereof, to or amongst the several members of such society, other than for carrying into effect the general intents and purposes declared by them.'

"These are all the provisions of the act of 1793, which consist of restrictions imposed upon Friendly Societies: the act at the same time conferred upon these institutions certain privileges and immunities. And your committee take this opportunity of observing, that it is, in their opinion, only in consideration of these advantages conferred by the law, that any restrictive interference can be justified with voluntary associations established for lawful and innocent purposes. They wish this principle to be kept in view, in considering as well the history of the law, as the suggestions which they shall make for amending it.

"It is true that the restrictions which the act imposes are, without exception, calculated for the benefit and security of individuals; nevertheless, it is for the individuals themselves to determine whether to adopt the provisions of the statute, which offers them at the same time regulation and privilege; or to remain perfectly unfettered by any thing but their own will, and the com

mon or more ancient law against fraud or embezzlement. For your committee apprehend that, although the act of 1793 appears to begin by rendering lawful the institution of Friendly Societies, there neither was at that time, nor is now, any law or statute which deprives the king's subjects of the right of associating themselves for mutual support.

66

The privileges afforded by Mr. Rose's act to the societies which conformed to its provisions were these:

"1. Any bonds required from the treasurers or other officers of the society, were to be given to the clerk of the peace, without fee or reward, and without being liable to the stamp duty; and in case of forfeiture, it was made lawful to sue upon such bonds in the name of the clerk of the peace for the time being, for the use of the society.

"2. In case of neglect of the treasurer or other officers of the society in rendering their accounts, it was made lawful for such society, to exhibit a petition in the High Court of Chancery, or the Court of Exchequer, in England, or the Court of Session in Scotland, or Courts of Great Sessions in Wales, who shall and may proceed thereon in a summary way, and make such order therein, upon hearing all parties therein, as to such court in their discretion shall seem just;' and 'no fee, reward, emolument, or gratuity whatever, shall be demanded, taken, or received by any officer or minister of such court, for any matter or any thing done in such court, in pursuance of this act ;' and the court was required to assign counsel learned in the law, and to appoint a clerk of such court to advise and carry on such petition on behalf of such society, who were thereby required to do their duty therein without fee or reward; and no proceedings in the court were chargeable with any stamp duty.

"3. The money of a Friendly Society in the hands of a treasurer or other person dying, was to have a preference over all the other debts of such a person.

"4. The officers were invested with the privilege of 'suing and being sued.'

5. And summary proceeding before two justices was allowed in the case of a member thinking himself aggrieved.

"6. But where the rules of a society provided for an arbitrator, the award was to be final, without appeal or reference to the justices.

"7. No member of Friendly Society was to be removed from any parish, until he should become actually chargeable. This was a valuable privilege in 1793, though, in consequence of a subsequent act extending the same provisions to all poor persons, it is now no longer a peculiarity."

"The act allowed to societies, which had been established before the passing of the act, a limited time for enrolling themselves under it: the next act in 1795 extended this period.

"This act of 1795 also recited, that several benevolent and charitable institutions and societies are formed in this kingdom, for the purpose of relieving, by voluntary subscriptions and benefactions, widows, orphans, and families of the clergy, and others in distressed circumstances;' and that such institutions have, or may have funds, which they may wish to place out on public securities, under the management of a treasurer;' and that in order to give stability to such institutions, it is necessary that their property should be secured under the authority of Parliament;' and extended to institutions of this description the provisions of the act of 1793.

"An act of 1803 merely provided that societies who had registered their rules at the sessions of places having peculiar jurisdiction, should be allowed to register them at the quarter sessions of the county, shire, or division; the registration in the Court of Peculiar Jurisdiction not being deemed sufficient under the act.

"In 1809 another act was passed, reciting that great advantage has been derived, as well to the public as to individuals, by the establishment of Friendly Societies under the act of 1793; and proceeded to make further provision for applying the summary remedy allowed by the former act, by requiring that the justices' order for paying money should specify the time and manner of payment, and by other legal modes specified in the act.

"In 1817 the provisions of former acts for the relief of poor persons equitably entitled to public funds, &c., were extended to Friendly Societies petitioning a court of equity for summary relief.

"Another act of 1817, not specially intended for the benefit of Friendly Societies, conferred upon them the most valuable privilege which they now possess. This was the savings bank act, which, at the same time that it gave to those institutions the privi

lege of receiving, for all money in the Bank of England, government debentures, bearing an interest of three-pence per day, allowed Friendly Societies to deposit their funds in any savings bank, and thus to derive the benefit of the high interest secured by the government debentures.

Act of Parliament, 1819.

"Your committee now come to the act of 1819, for the further protection and encouragement of Friendly Societies, and for preventing frauds and abuses therein. This new law made several important provisions respecting Friendly Societies. It is to the operation of these provisions that the attention of your committee has been principally directed. They propose to state the origin of the act; and in going through its several enactments, to explain the present state of the law, and their view of the amendment which it still requires."

Committee of the House of Commons, 1825.

The select committee of the House of Commons, in 1825, go on to report:

66

Between 1793 and 1819 a great number of Friendly Societies had been instituted. In 1802 no fewer than 9672 appear to have been returned to Parliament; and in 1815 the number of Friendly Societies were enumerated at 925,429.* Your committee have no doubt but that, during this period, a very considerable relief was afforded to parishes, and much additional comfort derived by individuals; but the system was assuredly defective in some points, and is supposed to have conduced to some purposes foreign to the objects of its formation.

"The first and chief defect in the law, as intended for the protection of the people, was the want of sufficient security against error in the original constitution of societies. The rules of every society were to be sanctioned by the justices at quarter-sessions, who had the power of rejecting such as should appear to be not conformable to the true intent of the act of 1793. Every society which professed to provide for sickness or old age, and declared no

*There is doubtless some error in this statement.

unlawful purpose, was necessarily admitted. An examination of the adequacy of the means by which the professed objects were to be accomplished, was not declared by the act to be, and certainly did not become in practice, a part of the duty of the magistrates. It is believed that throughout the country the justices acted ministerially, taking the word of the counsel employed to move for the registration of the articles, that nothing unlawful was contained in them. Indeed, except by reference to the tables of Dr. Price, which, though originally calculated at the desire of a committee of this House, had received no parliamentary sanction, and had not been confirmed by experience, neither counsel nor justices had the means of judging of the sufficiency of the payments required; and the tables did not extend to the cases of widows or children of deceased members, though these were cases contemplated by the law.

"Another material defect was found in the provision made against a fraudulent or inequitable disposition of the funds, on dissolution of the society. The act required that no society should be dissolved without the consent of a very great majority, not less than five-sixths of the existing members, and of the persons entitled to relief; but this majority was numerical only: and it is obvious that the younger and more healthy members, whose expectation of resorting to the common fund was more remote, might in many cases outvote those who were in daily expectation of becoming superannuated, or were liable to occasional sickness. It is true that the consent of persons actually receiving, or entitled at the time to receive relief, was required, in addition to the numerical majority; but if the moment for dissolving the club was chosen before any person had become entitled to a permanent allowance on account of old age, it might easily happen that, without any infringement of the law, a club might be dissolved, really to the serious injury of those who had contributed to it for many years; but, in truth, sufficient care had not been taken to guard against an infraction of the law. A summary legal remedy was given to all persons aggrieved; still it was a remedy by process of law, though the process was easy and inexpensive, and at the best it was a remedy, and not a prevention. A justice's order might be of little value to the injured person after the money which it adjudged to him had been squandered.

"But perhaps these cases of abuse and iniquity were less nu