New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-02-07
ARE THEY PUBLIC CONVEYANCES?
A QUESTION RELATING TO ELEVATORS IN
CONNECTION WITH INSURANCE
AGAINST ACCIDENTS.

When n man takes ont an accident insur 'nce
policy he Is naturally anxious 10 know Just wha,
II protects him against especially II Il pEoV'oes io'
a double indemnity In the case OF certain classes
OF accidents. Perhaps II would be regar"eu DS
most people important 20 know In advance OF
paying the premium what they were going 20 get
FOR their honey, but sometimes questions on IN
teresting 'ints do not occur until later. IhS was
the with n New Yorker who, after some ue-
liberation. procured accident policy ABOUT the
beginning OF the year. having been told py the
agent who negotiated the business that by paying
So a year ne would have insurance or Sow against
ordinary accidents. in case they resulted fataiy'
while I'm the case OF accidents occurring 10 puDHc
convcyances propelled by steam ca be or eIec'ricly
the insurance would be $4,000. with correspond
ing difference in the OF partial or total dis
ability the loss OF feet or hands, etc. Inc point
that If man was going to meet WIN an acct
dent ne would be twice much In pocket-or MS
heirs would be- in case of his death-it he had the
good sense TO let Il be caused by railroad train
electric or cable car or something OF that KIND
In talking over the matter with a friend Few
days later the question arose whether an elevator
Is public conveyance propelled by steam. cable or
electricity within the meaning Of the provisions or
the Insurance policy. This conversation led TO the
making Of inquiries at he offices Of some OK the
leading companies engaged IN writing accident In
surance. with interesting results.
At one OF them, in answer to the question, Does
tho double-indemnity provision In your policies
apply in cares OF elevator accldents?' an official
replied
Yes; this company considers that elevators come
under the class OF public conveyances covered by
the clause in policy relating TO this matter.
We willing 10 have the policy construed In that
manner. Elevators propelled by cables and
steam and electricity, all three. and in a sense
they are public conveyances."
That was accepted as satisfactory but at the next
Ofi lied w
There the official consulted said: THAT question
has been raised before and. SO far as this company
is concerned. we do not count elevators among
the ronVeyances injury in which Involves the pay
ment Of the double benefit. In fact, the latest
form OF policy which we have received only few
policy holders riding In elevators shall be classed
with ordinary accidents. and do not call for the
The Insurance man was in a communicative frame
OF mind. and went on to talk at some length re-
garding accident insurance lie said that this form
OF insurance was little over thirty years old in
this country, although considerably older in Eu-
I'm fact" he proceeded they ahead OF in
the pond For insurance OF this knd the rates
have steadily been reduced during the last thirty
he used 10 have to pay SIS for. There is no diff
ference made now between a commercial traveller.
the time. and man who goes TO his office from up
town every day and returns in the evening. The
anord 10 do. and substantially they provide the
same benefits for the same amount IN premiums.
Gus lines and not a few OF them have proved diSas
trous. Some Of the companies now include bicycle
accidents among accidents which call for the double
indemnity but do how they can continue
to do so very lang. Now and then the companies
get badly caught. In some OF the great railroad
accidents. like those at Ashtabula and Carr's Rock.
which are storiC. but such rare
At the Office of third company It learned
that elevator accidents are not counted among
those for which the double indemnity is provided
Here the language OF the policy IS I'm effect:
Against ordinary accidents. g coo: against acct
dents while riding as a passenger in or on public
leFf or cal 10
and provided by a common carrier for passenger
service. $1,000" In explanation, one Of the Off
Gals duty said
This does not cover accidents 10 people riding in
elevators, for the owners OF building having Gle
vators in II are not common carriers. Common car
riers are those who carry passengers for hire The
provision is perfectly clear all who understand
the meaning OF the terms used. and getting
hurt In an elevator would have any chance OF
getting the double benefit under policy The
accidents for which the double benefit Is given are
those occurring 10 passengers in railroad electric
or cable cars. steamships steamboa g. ferrybo
and the like"