The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-11-24
A DRASTIC REMEDY.
Fire Insurance Companies Ask Too
Much of Their. Patrons.

Boston Transcript.
The National Board of Fire Underwriters
sent delegate to the convention of the In
ternational Association of Fire Chiefs,
which conducted interesting sessions at
Charleston, S. c., recently, and he delivered
an address before these practical fire.
fighters on '"rhe Ounce of Prevention" An
ounce would hardly measure the pressure
of the drastic remedy proposed, which was
as follows: THE State must prohibit full
for a fire loss, and to anyone on whose
premises n fire originates, unless such &C.
cupant can show affirmatively that IL orig
mated through the carelessness or design OF
another party. Where the exact location OF
the origin of the fire remains III doubt, none
of the Immediately adjoining parties should
receive full Indemnity. The possibility or
any party then profiting by fire happen
ing on his premises would be so remote
that fires from this source would cease as
If by magic. Ii would also prevent indiffer-
ence TO dangerous flues, lighting and heat
ing apparatus or accumulation OF rubDlsh
in or about the premises This might re-
duce the fire loss considerably, but il would
result in such frequent instances of rank
Injustice in which the insured would be
entirely at the mercy of the insurer tnat
no Legislature would be warranted IN
passing such a measure.
The owner of building or the pro-
pretor of a manufacturing establishment
may have in his employ scores or per-
hapS hundreds of persons. The principal is
responsible for the acts OF his agents; SO,
legally, in an easily supposaDle case, ne
would be responsible should fire occur
on his premises through the careleSSnesS
of an cmploye. There would be no END
to the complications incident to such a
system. Again. 1t is hardly just TO throw
the whole burden of proof upon the party
that suffers from fire TO show that he used
due diligence in its prevention We have
in several States fire marshals whose bus
mess ii is TO investigate ell fires, espe-
oially those that Justify a suspicion of
criminal intent; but. beyond that. to make
the insured prove without doubt that the
fire originated through the carelessness or
design OF another party. gbefore reimburs-
ing hini for his losses, would be as r1dlc-
ulous AZ unjust. Even the officers ap-
pointed to investigate fires, With RE fIll
authority of The Stat behind them, are
able to do that in only a percentage of
cases.
We cannot blame the insurance comua-
Ties for feeling sore over their losses for
cnes that have occurred this season; but
they are a little too much inclined to pose
for the rational ash heap outside of thcn-
selves. They have the long end of the
lever every time They can take or re.
Ject risks at their plea srre; Ihey poast
full power TO make their clients DO
as they tell them. Then. why should
the whole responsibility De THROWN upon
the latter in case of a fire? Were such re-
quirernerts actually given statutory au-
thority II is probable that the companies
themselves would be the first to move for
their repeal. for nothing would more surely
tend to reduce their business to compare
lively small proportions. If men have to
pay roundly, not only for protection
against fire risk, but run the further risk
of losing their indemnity unless they can
prove things of which the proofs may be
destroyed self-insurance will grow in favor
very rapidly. The public will feel that
putting up large premiums just for a
chance of recovery in the event of loss is a
lottery in which the odds are against them.
The laws of France, which fix the respon-
sibility of the citizen on whose premises a
fire occurs, seem TO an American pretty
stern and rigid, but they are every way
preferable to those proposed at Charleston.
The citizen has the benefit of very strict
building laws. and that is the point at
which we should begin in this country IL
we are ever to make much progress in the
reduction of the fire waste. To stop short
Of that and then load down the owner or
occupant with exactions and inquisitions, is
to grind him between the upper and neither
millstones. Let US be rational even in our
distress.