Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1903-02-26

extent of loss or damage suffered by the
insured. The provision affecting this Is
the compulsory arbitration clause in
which the award in writing by majority
OF the referees shall be conclusive and
final upon the parties as to the amount
of loss or damage and such reference I'M
less waived by the parties shall be a con-
dition precedent to any right of action in
law or equity to recover for such loss.
He also pointed out in detail the inconsis-
tencies of the act OF 1895 with the previous
law. Il know" said Mr.. Libby, that al
the time the act of 1895 was passed the
lawyers, even did not understand the
scope of this provision" Mr.. Libby read
from the constitution of the State of
Maine the provision that in any civil suit
regarding property the right of trial by
jury shall be preserved. He gave it as
his opinion as a lawyer that the clause
in the clause in the standard policy re-
curing the waving of the right to trial
it would be pronounced unconstitutional
should a case turning upon it be brought
before the supreme court of Maine.
Senator Staples of Knox, said he had
the honor to introduce one of the inSur-
ance bills now before the committee. He
thought that when 80 states of this Union
representing the best talent of the coun-
try unanimously agree on the insurance
bill reported by the commissioners on uni
formity of laws was entitled to great
weight. He said he knew the people of
Maine are not satisfied with the workings
of the act of 1895. Il venture to say that
two-thirdS of the people are opposed to
that act'' said he. II want every member
IF this committee to look at this matter
rs an American citizen. The idea Of deny
ing a man the right of trial by jury when
his property is at stake. 1t is stigma
upon the great American people. Yon
nave heard what the constitution of
Maine has to say upon this point. Is there
any question that this law is unconstitu-
-ional? One judge told me if it ever came
before the law court it would be declar-
ed unconstitutional. Give every man
equal rights before the law. Are you
going home to tell your constituents that
you denied your fellow citizens the right
Of trial by jury? | know cases where the
insured party has taken one-half ~of his
actual loss. Give that man the right to
go before Il men and let them decide on
the amount of damages he is to receive"
Here Mr.. Libby said that the question
which arises is SO cases out of 100 in civil
suits a question of damages.
Senator Clark of Hancock, the author of
me of the bills. said the people of Maine
do not want to give up their dearest
are told that if we oppose this standard
policy the rates will go up he said;
but when the act of 1895 was passed the
rates We're reduced He referred to the
high rates of insurance at Bar Harbo;.
and ether places owing to the combined
action of the companies under the stan
iard policy. He thought if it is fair to
give such rights to insurance companies
similar rights should be given to all 9TH
er corporations. Put the insurance inter
ests on exactly the same basis as are all
the other interests in the State.
Hon. Charles r. Johnson of Waterviile.
spoke in opposition to the Maine standard
policy act specially Directing to the ar
filtration clause He cited a case in which
he was counsel in which the question of
waiver had compelled the judge to non
suit the case.
Hon L. c. Cornish of Augusta opened
the case for the renonStrantS, who OBJ
iect to any change in the standard policy
law
He called Hon. s. W. Carr of Bowdoin-
ham, commissioner of insurance, who
stated his views upon the matter. Mr.
Carr said that he had given the matter
great attention ever since the standard
policy had been in force Il am here in
the interests of the people, said MI
Carr. II was made commissioner in the
fall Of 1893, and by the Legislature of that
year was passed the anti-compact law.
This law cost the people of Maine over
100000. We had more complaints in 1854
than we have had since that time. con
ceived the idea of the Maine standard
policy law. | am responsible for that
law The insurance companies fought it
tooth and nail. All wanted the New York
form of policy. Seven years experience
leads me to say that it would be very I'M
wise to make change in the existing fire
insurance law. 1t would be a hardship
to our Grange as well as the old-line
companies. Arbitrate the loss and leave
the liabilities of the company to be de
cided by the courts Last year the in
surance companies paid to this depart
ment nearly 100000, Ex-Governors
Cleaves and Powers and the present Gov
ernor believe in the standard policy law.
1t is unfair to impose on these corpora
lions restrictions which will drive them
away compel them to raise their rates
Remarks favoring the retention of the
standard policy law were made by Repre-
sentative Morrison of Bar Harbor, Repre-
sentative Thomas of Harpswell, George
A. Macomber of Augusta, Mr.. Adams of
Boston, an officer of the Aetna Fire. In
surance Company, ex-senator Stearns of
Lowell, Representative Hammond Of
Paris, President Leavitt and Secretary
Rogers of the Androscoggin Grange In
surance Company, and President Tolman
and Secretary Brown of the Gardiner Mu-
tual Insurance Company, President Mil
lett of Gorham, of the Dirigo Mutual,
MAYNARD S. Bird of Rockland.
Mr.. J. w. Fitzpatrick of Portland, rep
resenting the Mutual Life Insurance Com
pany of New York. opposed the bill OFT
the ground that the first section drew into
its provisions the life insurance compa-
MES. and also objected to Section 3 of the
uniformity bill
Mr.. Cornish made the closing argument
for the remonstrants and Mr.. Libby flor
the supporters of the measure.