The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-11-23

To the Editor of the indianapolis Journal:
In your issue of yesterday there appeared
an article on the subject of insurance legis-
lation, the main part of which was a
quotation from Deputy Auditor Hart, and
some of the things he says are certainly
worthy of notice. In the first place he
says that the main objection to the presen;
arrangement is that the department has
been TOO dilgent iri detecting and blacklist
ing noncomplying insurance companies. l
Understand that the present administration
of the office is following in the footsteps
of the Henderson-Duke one in a much
better enforcement of the existing law thar.
We had had for many years, and Mr.. Hart
is extremely unkind and unjust in throwing
cut the insinuation that large proportion
of the companies are seeking some change
which will give them better opportunity
TO evade the law. On the contrary, the
real ground for objection by reputable
companies to the present law is the fact
that compliance with the law means
largely (and almost entirely the payment
of certain fees which Mr.. Harris own state
ment proves are out of all proportion to
the services rendered by his department
inasmuch as the fees which he proudly
claims to have collected are eignty-one
times much the cost of the services
The claim is also made that no case has
ever been cited of dishonest connivance
of the department wi any insurance COM
pany. and SO far L know this is true
and / hope will always be true but to my
mind the essential reason for this lies In
the fact that the insurance deputy does
not exercise, under the present law any
discretion judgment in the issuing OF
license TO them. except to collect the fees
IL we had "a law which required him 10
discriminate between companies on account
OF their methods or plans or the amount
and nature of their assets or their record
for paying losses as they should be paid
there would be a possibility or corruption
and bribery, but where compliance means
fee / cannot see that there is any.
| am one of the cranks who believe that
the prime object of an insurance DEPART
ment should be the supervision of the busi-
ness IN such manner as 10 protect the
public from unreliable and fraudulent COM
panies and to furnish il with detailed in
formation regarding each company which
does business in the State, ana that any
service which falls short of this is 100 dear
at any price. 1t Is a Iact that anyone seek
ing Information regarding insurance COM
p2nies in this State must use the reports
of New York, Massachusetts, Missouri or.
some of the surrounding States for the
simple reason that such reports as we have
in Indiana contain absolutely no statistics
of any value TO one who wishes TO know
of the methods or standing of the COM
panies. / do not hold that il is absolutely
necessary to separate the insurance de-
paT;ment frcIn the Auditors office al
though our insurance interests seem to me
to be large enough and important enough
TO stand alone. but what we need is a law
which viii amply protect the public and
the proper sort of companies, and a man,
at the head OF the department who UNDER
stands the insurance business and the law
and has the will and the power 10 enforce
the law. WALTER HOWE
Iryircton Ind Nov 10