New-York tribune., 1882-02-08
UNDERWRITERS And VAR RISK CLAIM
ANTS

To the Editor Of the TrtbUne.
SIR: | have recently read in the money
article OF The COhlmcciW AdreiSer the statement that
the claims OF the Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company
to a snare In the Geneva Award never had very sub
sfantal basis This is the truth Neither in law In
equity have they any standing In Congress the House
of Representatives, fewer than three occasions
after the fullest debate by decisive majortes rendered
a verdict against insurance cOmpanies-in the XLIVth
Congress. Ij9 to 80 against them; in the Senate,
XLVIth Congress, majority Of to against them. In
the High Court of Appeal in England, upon the
merits Of the lin the distribution OF the
Geneva Award fund in America and the rights Of insur
ance companies plaintiffs there was majority OF to
/ against the underwriters the court holding substan-
tialv that under the Treaty OF Washington the award
was made by Great Britain Nation TO the United
states s Nation act In lis own discretion In dspos
ing of the fund. In the language OF the Court This
money was in the first place recovered by the American
Government from England by treaty. The United
STATES Government did bind itself in anyway az TO
the disposal of the money and there was no obligation
on it to give any of that money to defendants There
fire there was a sum OF money the hands OF the Coy
eminent and there was no Obligations binding the Gov
ernment as to its disposal The Government was al
liberty to make a gift Of 1t to any person.
but was not bonnd to do so Can there possibly be any
more conclusive OF the baseless claims set mp by the
insurance companies. With the most powerful lobby at
Washington ever known and counsel OF the highest or
der retained they have failed of success Before the
Court Of Commissioners of Alabama Claims" opportu-
nity was offered to the Atlantic Mutual Insurance Com
pauy to present their proofs Of net losses they might
have sustained and receive their money the same "a any
other claimant who suffered loss They put In 40 ap-
pcarance. Three New-Engand companies exhibited
statement Of losses and were Idcnuihed therefor with
interest from date Of loss 70 date Of payment
Very adroitiy the Atlantic Mutual Insurance Com
pav refers to the thousands Of dealers who paid pre-
casual reader would infer that those who paid war
preniums would be speedily refunded their losses by
that company. Just the contrary; it would mainly 20
to the marine premium payers in mutual companies,
and 10 the stockholders in stock companies. War pre-
1nium uHyer. COud possibly receive rom the At
lanic Muual Insurance Company Including per cent,
interest per net OF their losses; IRON othe
mutual companies icSS anu IIo tuC SOONh 'O'N
In view OF all the facts as herein stated ia it likely the
Government VIII trdst an insurance company or any
third party to pay and distribute any iuhds, II may
cn1oSc To award in OF those who suffered loss,
whom n can better make the payment direct Ana lSt
unreasonable To cxpcct from the AtlltiC Mutual lnsur
aucc COMPANY graceful witndrawal from any urt her
struggle in hopeless case And on the other hand Is
il not rpasunabe that the Government should dscrnl-
nate between those lOyal citizens who Were p,ed 10
nay penalty Of milons of war premiums Tor lylng the
nag of their country ana those who on
rlrhed themselves the expense OF the war
risk payers aud the pOwcreSs condition OF he Govern
auswcr-that or senator Iil Of Georgia; Ihs fund III
tine hands Government thus derived by virtue OF
breach of international law, not individual Tghls-the
Government has ght to take the luud Whlch she col
ecs and distribute il the losers who lost by ylr
tue o that breach OF neutrality actual losers only; ana
she ought 20 do IT, not from sense of legal justice bnt
purely from sense Of pohuct Justice 10y the Govern
inrut tO her cItlZcns.' a W Ar PREMIUM Nl-Alh@ANl
iOr,. Feb. g. lSS2.