The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1885-02-05

fNNi NflnfNf lNHufNif w WV WV
NJ nfo waste In Texna was
va ON tho ,i00 and is
greater than That Of any state In the
union. In Now York II Ia only iato ON
tho $1,000, when the legislature
and courts, under the construction Of
existing laws, permit n man to make
money by the burning OF his property
~ may 10 40 readily done, tho Insurers
insist that u premium on arson In offered
by which not only they have To suilor
unjustly, but tho contiguous property
owners who may DO burned out, to
speak nothing of possible life dostruo-
ton. Tho leading principle Of insur-
ance should be indemnity, not reward,
for that would simply amount to
a premium and wager aud
encourage crime, No inducament
should bo held out for arson, tor many
human natures arc woak-very weak
indeed on the money quostion-and 1t
would be unjust to communities and in
divlduals. The true principle IL 10 per-
init only an insurance on proportion
ate amount of the value of tho property
insured. Then there Is mutually be-
tween policy holders and the companies
that will ov0ntuate In tho great public
good of decreasing tho percentage Of
fire waste. This should be the broad
view of those who logislate for tho state.
But some of those opposed TO tho COM
panies say they should determine upon
the value Of the property NJ the time;
that IL Is their own fault IL they don't,
etc. Any one acquainted with the mode
of insurance understands the tallacy OF
this argument. IL would simply result
in greater rates OF insurance and take
no regard of the reduction of value. Be-
sides, the matter, especially in the case
of stocks of goods, would have to be left
almost entirely with tho parties insur-
ing. Could an agent take an inventory
of a stock of merchandise or carpenters
agree upon the value of house years
after IL was originally valued? The Idea
OF honest insurance being to pay GER
tain proportion so as to discourage loss to
the public at large or imposition upon
themselves, it would seem that the sys-
tom OF adjusting the value of what was
destroyed is better than that of taking
an inelastic insurance, which would
present strong temptations TO the
owners OF depreciating property.
Just why the companies should not be
allowed to make contracts as to the
conditions upon which they may insure
is not visible to the naked eye. 1t is a
privilege accorded all other corpora
tons and individuals, unless the con-
tract should be against public policy or
an invasion of rights under some state
franchise. The companies contend that
full insurance is much more akin to vi
olation of public policy.
If all mon were honest there would be
no question az to adjustment of losses,
nor is there but little when the company
agrees to pay. Yet is there a merchant,
professional man or even farmer whom
the law would compel to act on the pre-
sumption in his dealings with his tel-
low-man that he must implicitly rely on
his statement unsupported, and often
attended by suspicious circumstances?
Insurance is a public necessity in this
age. 1t should be treated in its relation
ship with the public by the law-makine
power. Like public education il
should be regulated and controlled, and
above all with its reference to public
morals. So far, then, from increasing
the possibilities of crime and the
temptations thereto, especial care
should be taken to prevent and
prohibit such inducements to wrong
being offered. No other mode
can be conceived of than that OF
makingit it to the interest of men
not to lire their property. In this way
rates would become much less, the nee
essity for insurance sensibly diminish
and the property of the state saved by
millions each year from destruction
Last year the loss by fire in the state
amounted to 100000. OF this, compa.
MES paid 100000 and the balance was
dead loss. If the ideas of the insurance
mon prevail they claim reduction Of
the fire waste OF more than one-half the
first year.
!