The star. (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1874-1875, 1875-01-13
Lite Insurance.

ion that, "in this world Of varying for
tune" ! could make for those dependent
upon me, but if the imputation in ques1
tion be true, l should so regard it no
longer.
Being personally interested in this
matter and knowing that many Of your
readers are in like circumstances, nave
taken some pains to investigate this
question, and have succeeded in obtain
ing reliable statistics Of the death claim
experience OF seventy.One American
Lie Companies (including all the lead
ing ones IRON the date of their organiza-
tiOn to Dec. 81, 1872. They are as follows,
viz: Whole amount of death losses re-
ported, 47,323; amount of insurance,
Sl39, ,378, ST. w; number paid without liti-
fgatlon, 1896, amounting to 37,625,-
375 rs; number paid after litigation, ",
amounting to SSSO,677 II; number sue
$5l3, ,232 10; number unsettled at tnat
date, 100, amounting to $857, 1892; thus
showing that of death claims amounting
| to more than one hundred ard thirty
nine millions Of dollars, nearly ninety
nine per cent. have been paid without
litigation.
What other class of contracts can show
fultillment SO universalp When loss
is contested, we are sure to hear OF 1t,
but the millions that are paid each year
we hear nothing of.
Many people reason upon this subject,
and the worthy editor OF the Commercial
seems to be one OF them, as though the
money paid for death claims came out of
the pockets Of the managers OF the COM
panies, not seeming to consider that 1T
makes not the difference of penny with
them, except in purely stock companies,
whether in an individual case loss is
paid or not. 1t is true that il the officers
are policy holders, as it is to be presumed
they invariably are, their pecuniary in
terest would be the same as that Of other
policy holders, no more, no less. The
temptation to defraud Life companies is
very great, tor if successful very small
amount invested will secure in return q
comparatively large sum and the amount
OF risk to the insured is very slight.
Very seldom, indeed, do we hear OF per-
sons being punished for attempting fraud
upon Life companies. Ii the party is
dead the companies Of course have no re-
satisfied to detect the fraud and save
loss.
The tone of public morals relative to
the matter of imposing upon corpora
tions is now too high. This was plainly
exemplitied during the late war, when
men who would not cheat neighbor to
the ex tent OF a farthing would swindle the
government of thousands and then prob
ably boast OF their sharp management,
and if many of the articles appearing OF
late in the Commercial are true,
we need not 60 outside the EDITORS own
city to lind numerous examples confirni-
ing the above statement. That compa-
nies frequently resist the payment OF
death claims upon technical points of
error without any regard to materiality
OF tact, no one who has candidly consid-
cred the TACT will believe.
In the editorial referred to case is
cited from the United States District
Court of Missouri as being one where a
company was not "allowed to crawl out
of its undertaking through technical
gimlet hole"
1t is stated that in the application for
insurance the insured declared that he
did not use alcoh olio stimulants, that he
never had inflammatory rheumatism,
and that he never had an habitual cough
1t was proved that the party, at the time
| his application was made, did use alco.
holic stimulants, and that he had had
the rheumatism, and did have an habit.
| ual cough. Now the editor seems to
think that because the party happened
| to die of some other disease 1T was 8
great injustice to allow the company tt
escape the payment, not recognizing the
fact that II true answers had been giyeI
in the application no company would
have taken the risk, and consequent,
no loss been incurred.
| If the above case is one where com
pany ,'crawled out of its undertaking
through technical gimlet hole," would
like 10 know what the case must bt
where the editor would say that a com
pany ''crawled out through technicaP
augur '.hole."
Ii can not be otherwise than unpleas-
ant Tor officers OF Life company to refuse
| the payment OF death claim, especially
when the claimant Is supposed to be non
est, but that 1t will sometimes be thei
duty, being, as they are, the custodian
of the interests OF the policy holders a
large, is too apparent to be doubted. lie
lit he once understood that all lOsse
would be paid without investigation O
question, and wide door would b'
opened Tor every conceivable fraud
Such as the Goss case and the "Ne y
port frauds" would become matter o
every day occurrence, and life compan
les, instead of being institutions for tn
protection of the widows and orphans. 0
, honest men would become abettors o
fraud and crime.
II In conclusion, Wnlle am one VI tbos
who believe that Life insurance com
panies should take every practicabl
precaution to prevent improper risk
being taken in at the door, and that the.
should never refuse the payment OF
claim without good and justitable rea
son, yet can not but think that If tn
/ public generally were as honest wit
companies as with individuals, we shoul
T hear very little about Life lnsuranc
Decisions" in the Court.
JUSTICE.
1 U,x,, ,oh ronI ~ ppo So ttfrriI1 !, nh