Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1879-03-01
MESSAGE OF GOV. MARKS
To the House Oh Representative
Accompanying His Veto of
tne Insurance RfEE

The Governors private secretary
appeared at the bar of the House
and stated that the Governor had
requested him to return the House
bill to amend the fire insurance laws
of Tennessee with his disapprOvaI,
with the following reasons:
Gentlemen of the House of Rep
resentatives-I herewith return,
without my approval, House bill
No. 81, entitled IAN act to amend
the Fire Insurance Laws of Tennes-
see," with my objections. The first
section of the bill makes "the
amount written upon the policy
the measure of value where real
property insured "shall be wholly
consumed by fire." and the second
section provides ''that in case any
property insured against fire is par
TALLY destroyed by fire,
the amount written upon the face of
said policy as the value of the same
shall be taken as the value of said
property in determining the amount
of said loss or damage"
An analysis of the proposed law
will show that it is not only in con-
flict with public policy but that it
will operate, if it becomes the law,
to place the assured at the mercy of
the insurance companies as it is the
interest of the insured not to value
the property insured at its full value
it happens that the great bulk of
property insured is valued in the
contract Of insurance far below its
actual value. Under the existing
law, where there is a partial loss of
property insured by fire, the assured
is entitled to recover the full value
of the property destroyed, but if the
bill in question is made the law the
recovery of the assured will be linn
tied to the value fixed in the policy.
To illustrate: If a stock of goods
worth $4,000 is insured for 81, 800
and one-half of the stock is de
stroyed by fire, under the law as it
now exists, the assured would be
entitled to recover s., 900, but if the
proposed bill becomes the law the
assured will be entitled To recover
no more than 1885. So, under the
proposed law, if 4 dwelling hOHSe is
undervalued i'm the policy and is
partially destroyed 1t will be inn
possible for the assured to have In
demnity. AS the rule of insurance
companies is to undervalue prop
erty, and to Overvalue ii the eXcep-
ton, it results that the great bulk Of
property insured is undervalued,
and hence If the proposed bill be-
comes the law it will follow that in
81 f.al 4 n+
occur that the assured can have full
fore that the proposed bill, If it be- |
comes a law, will givet the insurance |
companies an uncOnSciOnable adj |
vantage over the assured.
Public policy imperatively de-
mands that all temptation to incen- |
diarlsm should be excluded from |
our insurance laws. Under the pro- F.
posed bill it is obvious that if real |
property is overvalued in the policy /
by mistake or design that the owner I.
wGald no longer have an interest in /
its preservation, but on the contrary \
he would be interested in its de- /
No legislation can be /
Wholesome which affords so strong
& temptation to fraud or negligence.
If the bill were confined in its APP
pIicatiOn to isolated real property it
would not be so objectionable, IS the
whole loss would fall upon the COM
pany taking the improper risk, but
where there are owners of cOntigu-
Gus or adjacent property it would be
injustice TO them to hold
out TO the owner, who Is over
insured, a temptation SO strong.
To prevent incendiariSm, our laws
ought to discourage Over-insurance.
This may be safely done by prOvid-
ing that where property is over
valued and destroyed the actual
the treasury of the county where
the loss occurs for the benefit Of
schools or some other public pur-
pose, and by revOking the llcsnse of
insurance agents who permit prop
perry to be OVervalued. Such legisla-
ton would remove all incentive to
over value property, upon the part
Of both parties to the contract of In
surance, and all temptation to de-
strOy il.
In orlerto dOjuSticetoth the assured.
when loss occurs, the law ought to
provide such penalty for refusal
to pay the loss as will amply indem-
Nifty the insured, in the event the
without sufficient cause,
refuses prompt payment.
ALBERT $. MARKS.
Governor.
February 20, 1873.
GEORGIA'S new 4 per cent. bonds [
NJ 80. H., =