The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1872-02-14
THE PR ESS.
WEDNESDAY MORNING, FEB. IA, 1872.
Protection that is not Professionalism
Foreign Insurance Companies be
Driven from Maine.

There is no feature of the protective policy
more odious than that which aims to build
up Chinese walls around the different States
and to place them in antagonism to each
other. If protection is to be carried to that
faulty excess, and if each State is to seek
business and commercial prosperity at the
expense of all the rest, there is logically no
stopping place till county is arrayed against
county, town against town, school-district
against school district, family against family,
and finally all human society is made up OF
mutually repelant and hostile individual ee-
ments. Protection, at best, is founded on the
exclusive and selfish qualities of human ma
ture, and though the stern exigencies OF ma
tional life may sometimes require its Temporal
ry adoption, it is certainly most unwise to
give it place in the policy of any smaller
political organizations. ra....
There is one section in an act relating to
insurance companies now pending before the
Legislature that seems open to the objection
of being an attempt to foster the few feeble
insurance companies in this State, not only at
the expense of foreign companies, but at the
expense of the security of the people at large.
1t is as follows: .sg .I D. t.isia
SECT T. Whenever by the laws of any other
State of the United States, any charges, taxes,
fines, penalties deposits Of money, or of securi-
ties, or other obligations or prohibitions, are
imposed upon insurance companies Incorporate
ed or organized under the laws of this State, or
upon the agents of such insurance companies,
so long as such laws continue in force, the
same charges, taxes, fines, penalties, deposits
and obligations, shall be imposed upon all in
surance companies doing business in this State,
which are incorporated or organized under the
laws of such other State, and upon their
agents.
1t will be seen that this provision is retalia-
tory, and has that consideration to excuse it.
1t is said that States like New York, Con-
necticut and Massachusetts, keep our compa-
MES out by oppressive taxes and other hostile
legislation, -why should we not retaliate?
But we are not in situation to look at the
matter in this way. 1t is well known fact
that Maine has not proved, SO far, by any
means a productive field for fire insurance
companies. Most of them doing business
here at this time have lost more than they
have gained. Our great CONGREGATIONS have
swallowed up much more than the prof
its derived from their Maine business.
And it is upon these companies
that we rely for the greater part
of our insurance. 1t is notorious that
our local underwriters could not safely take
1.-THE of the necessary risks. In great emer
gencies, too, it has been found that the I'M
limited capital invested in the great corpora
tions chartered elsewhere affords the only real
security. Can we afford, even as a measure
of retaliation, to drive these great companie,
out of the State? Would not such course
leave our property in a most insecure situa-
ton? The foreign companies declare that
their losses in Maine have been so large that
the imposition of even a trivial tax would be
sufficient to compel them to close up their
business here. If this policy is adopted, it
may serve to foster some of our Maine COM
panies, but it will leave the people exposed to
very serious evils. In State matters, at any
rate, we believe in taxation for revenue and
not for protection. cgd tI la ...i. r!ag.rt