Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1886-10-29
The valued policy mn.

10 in the premises.
The valued Policy bill.
The indications are that one of the most
and important contests in this
legislature will come on the question Of the
passage of the valued policy" insurance bill,
80 called, which was introduced almost at the
beginning of the session by Mr.. Harvey of
Topsham. This bill was undoubtedly sug
gested by and founded on the valued policy
law which the New Hampshire legislature en-.
acted in the summer of 1885, and which ere.
sted SO much excitement and disturbance in
insurance and business circles in that state.
But Mr.. Harvey's bill is more stringent in its
provisions than the New Hampshire law. Its
text is as follows:
SEC. 1. In all cases where any insurance company,
person persons shall insure issue policy Of in
surance against loss by FIRE or lightning upon the
property Of any individual corporation in this
state, and the property so insured shall be wholly de-
stroyed without criminal intent or fault the part of
the insured the amount Of insurance specified in said
policy upon said property shall be taken to be the
amount of loss sustained by the said individual or
corporation in whose favor the said policy is issued
and that sum shall be paid by such insurer to the
sured, anything specified in said policy to the contra
ry Notwithstanding. PrOUided, Wherever there is
partial destruction damage TO the property insured
1t shall be the duty Of such insurer pay the assured
a OF money equal to the damage done to the prop
erty, not exceeding the whole amount Of insurance
thereon.
SIC 2. In any suit that may be brought in this
state against an insurance company person insur
ing as specified in Sec. Of this act, to for
total loss by FIRE or lightning other casualty to
property so insured, the amount Of damage shall be
the amount expressed in the contract policy as the
sum insured and no other evidence shall be admitted
trial to the value Of the property insured. Pro-
pided, Wherever there is partial destruction or dam
age to the property insured shall be the duty of the
insurer to pay the assured the full of such
damage aud such damage may be shown on trial: but
in shall the insurer be liable for sum in dam
ages greater than the amount expressed in such policy
contract.
SEc. g. This act shall not affect any policies or con-
tracts of insurance issued entered into prior to
jan. l, 1887
The first section of the New Hampshire
law provides for the revocation of the license
Of any insurance company which attempts to
take an action against it out Of the state
courts into those Of the United States and of
any company which enters into a compact OF
combination to govern or control rates. The
second and essential section of the Law is the
following:
SEC. q In any suit that may be brought in THU
state against insurance company to recover for
total loss sustained by fire other casualty to real ee
tate or buildings the land OF another the amount
of damage shall be the amount expressed in the con
tract the sum insured and other evidence shal
be admitted trial to the value OF the property in
sured. IroCided, Whenever there partial destruc
ton or damage to the property insured It shall be thu
duty OF the company to pay the assured sum Of mon
equal to the damage done to the property and
vided, further, that nothing in this section shall b.
construed to prevent the admission OF testimony Il
| prove over-insurance fraudulently obtained.
Another law enacted by the New HAmpshir,
legislature at the same time provides that
SEC. l. All statements of description or value in al
application or policy of insurance are representation
aud not warranties erroneous descriptions or state
meuts of value or title by the insured do not proven
his recovering on his policy, unless the jury ind tina
the difference between the property described
as it really existed contributed to the loss materi
ally increased the risk; change in the property in
sured, or in its use or occupation breach Of an
of the terms Of policy by the insured do not afe
the policy Except during the continuance of tn
change, use or occupation); shall any misreprt
sentaon of the title or interest Of the insured in tn
whole or part of the property insured, real pei
sonal, unless material or fraudulent prevent his re
covering on his policy to the extent Of his insurab
interest"
The differC nee between the New Hampshir
Law and Mr.. Harvey's proposed law lies main
ly in the fact that the New Hampshire statut
provides, in the last clause of the section frs
quoted, for the admission of evidence st
prove over-insurance frsuduently obtained,
while Mr.. Harvey's bill seems to be intende
to cut off the admission of such evidence an
W S5tdbllbu al HOu Cldu Iul6 u COmp6l III
payment of the full amount of the policy i
case of total loss by fire. In this respect.
least, Mr.. Harveys bill is overdrawn, unwis
and unjust
The evident purpose of the New HampshiI
law is, in the first place, to make insuranc
companies and agents careful as to the amour
of risk they take on any piece of property
| in ha p1aoa 30 al.
protection to the assured, by compelling th
companies to pay, in case of total loss, VIVA
ever sum they have agreed to pay. The la
in effect says to the companies, "If the ideI
tical piece of property which you insure an
have your pay for insuring burns up, 20
shall pay for it what you agreed to pay, III
less it is shown that the insurance was oil
tanned by fraud" and it is difficult to ST
where the injustice towards the insurant
companies lies in such a law-for it must
borne in mind that the law does not apply
partial losses, as on stocks of goods or man
facturers' implements but only to total loss
such as are most likely to happen to far
buildings or other isolated property.
The enactment of the New Hampshire la
NhASNcNSAiJ grew Oub VI HEOuR Ut unlu
methods which the insurance companies wei
in the habit of following in the settlement
losses in that state. We do not know tn
such methods have been praoticed in this sta
in way to give rise to any general complain
against the companies. In this section, {
the contrary, we think their policy has bee
to be generous and prompt in the settlemei
of losses, on the ground, doubtless that SUI
a course is their best advertisement and sure
to bring them more business. For this rea
} on, unless different state of things has Q
listed in other parts of the state, we think Il
, Legislature should be careful how it arous
t needless antagonism or precipitates an u
called-for conflict with the insurance comp
MES. But we also think there is no reast
why any needed legislation to properly pr
, tect the rights of the assured should not
enacted. When the New Hampshire law W
l passed the foreign companies at once cancel
3 all their policies in that state and withdre
3 their agents, and none of them have go
back there as yet. This action we believe
t have been unwise and uncaled for. 1t .
q the companies in the unfortunate attitude
= attempting to bulldoze the people of the sta
: and through them the people of other stat
+ who might dare to pass laws not pleasing
I them. Their true way would have been
have scaled down their risks if necessary tc
t point where they willing to carry them a
y then have gone on with their business. Il
; attitude which the companies chose to assuI
9 in New Hampshire, it seems to US, shou
d not influence the members of our own leg
} lature in their views of what legislation,
g any, is needed.
r 1t has undoubtedly come to be too mu
n the habit of insurance agents to let those "
, ask insurance set their own valuation up
It their property and name the amount for viii
l. 1t shall be insured. Such a course tends
/ make large risks, large premiums, and lar