Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1900-02-13
Object to Provisions in the General
Insurance Bill,
OPPOSED TO TAKING OUT A $50 LICENSE
Presentation ofva Petition to the
House District Committee.
NUMEROUSLY SIGNED PAPER
-A~H-

| ce1ved several protests from local insurance
| agents against the bill now pending before
| the committee to provide general insur-
ance law for the District of Columbia.
| Abraham Fisher protests to the commit
tee as follows: Il desire to enter my
earnest protest against sections and 10
| of the bill to regulate insurance In the Dis
trict of Columbia, now pending before
your committee. If this bill is passed I
| will be compelled to pay $50 year to con-
ttnue my present insurance business 1 al
ready pay a tax Of $50 year as real estate
broker and it would be unjust and abso-
lutely unreasonable II l had to nav this
additional tax on my small insurance bus
| mess. 1 trust you will impose a tax on the
companies, and relieve entirely the brok-
ers, who are already overtaxed."
rhomas w. Fowler objects to sections
and 10 also. and says: II am now paying
$50 per year as real estate agent which
is more than Is required from any other
trade or profession. In my business I am
| compelled to place my insurance in more
than one company, and under the provi-
sions of this bill / would be required to
pay additional $50 to continue placing
| the small amount Of insurance which am
| handling. This tax would be a very unjust
one. Tax the companies, who are the
greatest benefciaries.'
Five Reasons for Opposition.
| lions to the bill:
II earnestly protest against sections and
| 10 Of H. r. bill No. 1887. to regulate insur-
ance in the District of Columbia. for the
| following reasons:
First. Because it will compel about 800
worthy men, who now earn a livelihood as
| insurance brokers. for more than one COM
pany. to abandon the business as they are
| unable to pay the exorbitant license tax
of $50 a year. Many of these men are dis
charged department clerks and old soldiers
who solicit a little life, fire. accident and
plate-glasS insurance in order to support
| their families.
| Second. 1t is not an equitable or just
tax. because solicitor who has a very
small business for two more companies
| pays out Of his small fees $50 year. while
\ an agent, who represents one or 100 COM
| panies and receives 81 or 100000 in pre-
| mtums per year. pays only $50. which Is al
ways charged to the companies because his
| business is large enough to justify it, At
present an agent who represents twenty
| pany) year, while under the proposed bill
| he would pay but SO -
Third. There are about 1873 real estate
| agents now paying $50 yearly license. which
is decidedly more than isfpaid by any other
trade or profession, and 1t would be an
outrage to compel thent'to pay $50 addi-
| tional in order to retain their insurance
| business. The repofe of the assessor of the
| District Of Columbia shows that 1873 real
| estate agents paid tfieir license for the year
| 1899. and he estimates that 300 will pay for
| Fourth. 1t is clearly evident that the
purpose of such high tax is simply to
drive out Of the business a large number of
better enable favored few Whose licenses
| are paid by the companies) to monopolizo
the business, to increase the rates and
| crush out all competitors
| Fifth. These provisions sire unjust and
absolutely unreasonable because they i'm
| pose high tax on a mans labor and al
most mos, entirely relieve the insurance corpora
| lions who receive the major benefits there
| from. The companies should be made to
| pay the entire tax in proportion to the
amount OF premiums they receive.
| Il attach hereto a copy OF a petition
! had signed by 233 citizens Of the District of
Columbia, who are actually engaged as in
surance solicitors and agents. This petit
ton was filed with your committee at the
last session Of Congress.
| Il trust you will report against sections
| and 10 of the bill. and replace them with
a provision which will impose tax of $50
on each company for each and every writ
| Ing agent who countersigns the policies and
| L per cent on the gross receipts This is
| the same tax we now pay, except that the
| license would be increased from SIS to $50. -
Numerously Signed Petition.
The petition presented In the last Con-
| gress, referred to above, was as follows:
| I'VE, the undersigned insurance agents,
brokers and solicitors doing business in the
| District of Columbia, enter our earnest pro-
| test against section 8 Of Senate bill 1887 to
| regulate insurance in the District Of Co
| .umbia, now pending before your commit
| tee We object and protest against that
| section of the bill for the following rea-
| soEs:
First. 1t will tend to concentrate the
| insurance business in the hands Of few
large corporations, and will better enable
| them to maintain high rates and to crush
out all nall councillors.
| second. 1t will deprive hundreds OF
| worthy, Industrious and deserving persons
| from earning a livelihood. and will prevent
nearly all the real estate brokers' who now
| pay $50 per year license, from engaging in
| the insurance business.
| Third. 1t is not just and equitable tax,
| because an agent who does a small business
| and represents no company, except as a
| solicitor. pays the same license as a broker
| who does a very large business and repre-
| sents many companies.
| Fourth. Because it imposes license tax
| upon the agent and solicitor. and relieves
| entirely insurance corporations, who now
| pay under the existing law SIS each license
| ceiyed each year.
Fifth. Because no other trade or profess
sion Is required to pay a license tax except
| real estate broker
| I'VE trust that you may report against
| this provision of the bill which requires the
| payment of license tax of $50 to write in
| surance in the District.
| This provision is unjust, arbitrary and
absolutely unreasonable Its tendency and
| evident purpose is to crush out all small
| operators and concentrate the entire In
| surance business in the hands Of a favored
| few.
I'm this day in " hich the public sentiment
| throughout the country Is crystalhzing
against trust legislation and monopoly. we
| trust that through no action OF your hon.
| BILE body will such unjust and odious
| legislation be foisted on this District to the
great injury OF the public interested iii low
rates and to the oppression Of the small
| operators"
1
State Control und Home Rule.
Prof. E. Dana Dufand's public lecture at
the Central High School, this evening will