Probably everyone who has been responsible in any way for the underwriting of life assurance has paused on some occasions to consider whether an extra premium which it is proposed to charge for personal or family history is really justifiable. It is comparatively easy to express this hesitancy as a problem that requires solution by asking whether the mortality among those persons having a certain family history or personal defect is heavier than that among other assured lives, and if so, to what extent. At present there is, however, little to help towards a direct solution and the amount of extra premium is based on an “educated guess.” It is, of course, only statistical evidence that can finally prove the necessity for an extra or justify its amount, but although insurance offices have been doing business and charging extra premiums for many years no complete attempt has been made to solve the problem.

At first sight one might perhaps be loth to admit that a very close analogy can be drawn between the insurance of under-average lives and the investment of life assurance funds. It seems to me, however, that in some important respects the two operations are comparable.

I think it must be admitted that practically any life, however bad, would be insurable provided the risk to be run could be accurately assessed and the requisite premium charged. Similarly, almost any investment would be worth buying provided that the risk of the loss of capital could be accurately gauged and the rate of interest was sufficiently large to pay what may be called an investment rate and to provide a sufficient margin to cover the risk of loss of capital.