New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-07-18

CLOSING ONES HOUSE FOR TIE SUMMER.
The steadily increasing inclination of city
families to close their houses for the summer
months while they withdraw to the country.
and also, perhaps to own cottage in the
mountains by the seaside which stands shut
and deserted through the winter, is raising a
novel question of insurance. The insurance
companies consider that, upon the whole. the
risk of fire is increased when the dwelling has
no inhabitants. True, there are considerations
on both sides. When the house is uninhabted
the cook will not kindc the fire with Kerosene
oil nor will the children try experiments with
matches around the parlor curtains; nor will
amateur plumbers heat "eXplosve harpoons :"
| III the kitchen range, for soldcrng-irons. But
upon the other hand, the building is more ac-
ccsslble to tramps and incondaries; the crime
of burning the house to defraud the company is
more easily pcrpetrated; and an accidental fire
catching from any conflagratOn in the neigh
bOrhood stands less chance of being promptly
detected and eXtinguishcd. Balancing all
possibilities, the companies prefer that the
dwellings on which they risk money shall be in
habited; hence policies commonly contain a
condition, couchcd in one form of language or
another that if the house becomes "unoccu-
least it shall be suspended during the vacant
weeks. Many householder unthinkngly sus-
ponds his insurance by closing his dwelling for
the summer. not remembering or perhaps never
having noticed that his policy contains a short,
fine-print condition of this kind.
BY a recent decision of the Court of Appeals.
a Mr.. Herman has lost his insurance under the
following circumstances He owned summer
| residence in Ulster County, which was insured
| unless it should become "vacant or unoccu-
! pied" From May until November he and his
| family wont to live in it but when winter
| came they closed it and came to this city.
Meantime they left their furniture in it, and the
building and contents in charge of n
| farmer who dwclt in II small house on the Herr
| man lands, and every few days visited the main
| building. Moreover Mr.. or Mrs. Herman went
| up once fortnight to see that all was right
| In short, 1t was II case of rather uncommon
care taken, through the winter of q summer
| residence. But thc house was burned cause of
| fire not stated and the Court of Appeals saws
| there is no claim on the company because the
| building unoccuped. In order that a
| dwclling-house may be considered as "occu-
| pied" there must be in it human beings using
| 1t us their customary place of abode they need
| not, to be sure, be in it every moment continu-
| ouSly, but 1t must be the place where they usu-
ally return and habitually stay Visiting it
| frequently, or arranging with neighbor to
watch it from his dwelling near by, is not oc-
| cupying it.
| Many city dwelling stands closed through
| July and August under no other arrangements
| for care of it than that the owner means 10 re-
| turn to it for Il day once or twice season. and
| meantime has the promise that some ncighb or.
or the police, will open and air il now and then.
or take frequent look mt it. 1t hcloovcs the
owners of dwellings thus situated to look to
| their policies.
| 1t is a curious illustration of the need of
scrutinizng ones policy carefully that this same
| Mr.. Herman appears To have held another
| policy issued by another company upon this
same country house, the wording of which was,
that the insurance should he void if the Drc-
misses became "yacant and unoccupicdn ON
| this policy the Court of Appeals said Ca year
ago. that he could recover; for although his
cottage was not occupied, it WAS not vacant.
"Nacant,' said the Court on that oecasjon.
means. empty" Now the house WAS not EMMY.
for the furniture cooking utensils piano. beds
| and summer clothing were left in il. But I'M
| less II was vacant, or empty and unuccupicd
| both, the insurance was not lost