Talk:Manhattan Life Insurance Company

Regarding reparations
The article referenced by the person who removed the information states: "The policy information, which named 400 slaveholders and about 600 slaves, was provided by Aetna Inc., American International Group Inc., Manhattan Life Insurance Co., New York Life Insurance Co. and Royal & Sun Alliance." - So yes, New York Life Insurance Co. were indeed defendants, but not the only ones.

Similarly, the Philadelphia Enquirer article states that: Another firm, Manhattan Life Insurance Co., wrote that it joined others in insuring not African slaves, but an 1854 shipment of 720 Chinese "coolie" laborers, "valued at $120 each," on the fast clipper Sea Witch.

''Three "jumped overboard and were lost." An additional 11 "died of sundry diseases." The company paid $408 as its share of the death claims to the laborers' owners. Its profit: $432.''

I see nothing controversial about adding this information. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:13, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Yabllib says: We (Manhattan Life) would know if we were sued in 2002. But the first paragraph of the article says "A lawsuit has been filed against three U.S. companies, demanding compensation for profits they are alleged to have made from the slave trade." Please note it says specifically that only 3 companies were defendants. New York Life Insurance, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. and Norfolk Southern Corp."'' What you cite above only states that Manhattan Life provided policy information... not that they were sued.

The only 3 companies sued were
"The 2002 lawsuit was filed Wednesday in New Jersey on behalf of Richard E. Barber, Sr., a former deputy executive director of the NAACP, naming New York Life Insurance, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. and Norfolk Southern Corp."

Regarding the second statement from the Philly Inquirer,
It wouldn't made sense to keep it as written since the first (and leading statement) set the tone for this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yabllib (talk • contribs) 20:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I see mediation was rejected... now what do we do? Wikiopedia just needs the truth reported. And in all fairness, do we know the outcome of the lawsuit against those 3 companies? Anyone can sue for anything, Doesn't mean its valid or that the case wasn't lost. Yabllib (talk) 21:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)Yabllib
 * Ah, I see. Hello duck.
 * Given that they were asked to give evidence in a lawsuit brought by the NAACP and that they were made to disclose information based on California laws regarding their activities, I would say that is noteworthy. They were one of only a small handful of companies who actually still trade and have a record of this.
 * Honestly I'm shocked this was turned down for mediation. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * We could always rephrase it!
 * Manhattan Life Insurance Company has been the subject of legal matters regarding reparations, due in part to its legacy of insurance against the loss of "collie" (a.k.a. Chinese) laborers. The policy valued each laborer at $120, though after 4 men died on the way to the United States, the company maintained a $432 profit.
 * Better? PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:46, 9 January 2015 (UTC)