THE ALBERT OFFICE.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR."] SIR,—My attention having been recently directed to the following statement in your number of the 4th inst., " What is a policy- holder for except to pay ? ' He is not entitled,' said one of the directors (Mr. Vansittart Neale) to policyholders in the Medical Invalid, ever to ask a question about his office's security,' " I beg to say that, so far as I am concerned, the statement is completely mistaken. I was never present at any meeting of Medical and Invalid policyholders, having never been in any way connected with them, except as a director of the Albert, which I did not become until several years after it had acquired the Medical and Invalid business. Nor did I ever make any such declaration. The story has probably arisen out of the misapprehension of an answer made by me at a meeting of the Albert policyholders held at Calcutta in May last, to a question as to the legal rights of policyholders under the deed of settlement of the Albert Company, which I stated did not give to them any right to question the directors ; this right being, by the deed, given exclusively to the shareholders. There was no question as to their moral right to ask any questions they might think fit, it was a question simply of legal rights conferred by a particular instrument, and to that point only by answer applied.—I am, Sir, &c., E. VatrsirrauT NEALE.
2 Eldon Road, Hampstead, September 16, 1869.
Previous page
