One hundred years ago
THE Bishop of Peterborough has car- ried through the second reading in the Lords of a Bill to amend the law relating to insurances on the lives of children. The objects of the Bill are two, — to limit the sum for which the life of a child can be insured, and to secure that the money shall not come into the hands of the parents. By the first clause, no Society may pay more than from £4 to £8, according to the age of the child. By the second clause, no Society shall pay anything at all excepting to the person actually conducting the child's funeral. By other clauses it is sought to make the certificate of death, which must be produced in order to obtain payment, more of a check upon the parents. A Registrar of Deaths is forbidden to give a certificate unless the cause of death has been certified by a registered medic- al practitioner, or proved by some satisfactory evidence. The compliance of an Insurance Society with the law is secured by a money penalty in the case of the Society, and a personal penalty in the case of any officer or member who is a party to the breach of the law.
Is it necessary to pass such a law at all? That is the first question suggested by the Bill. Is the Bill adequate to the need? That is the second question which presents itself in the event of the first being answered as the Bishop of Peter- borough wishes.
Undoubtedly it is a terrible disgrace to us that such a change in the law is wanted. It means that there are English fathers and English mothers who cannot be trusted not to murder their children.
The Spectator, 21 June 1890
Previous page
