The Washington times., 1903-01-04
FIRE LOSSES LIGHTER
THAN FOR TWO YEARS
Insurance Business Prosper
ed in Same Proportion,
MOST DAMAGE AT PATERSON
Advance in Rates Cause Renewed Ac-
tlvity IN the Work of
Underwriting

The year 1902 was comparatively a
light one in the fire losses of the United
States and Canada. Allowing a generous
estimate for the month of December in
the absence of carefully compiled figures
by the underwriters. the total losses
were hardly in excess of 1851 900, Geo
This is about 80, 200 GOO less than the
losses for 1901, and between $4,000 .0G0
and $4,000, 900 less than the record OF
1900, which was the worst year in the re-
cent history of fire underwriting. The
allowance for December, $13, 900 GOO, in
arriving at the general total, was 81, 00O,-
600 larger than that Of December. 1900
The losses for the last six months of
last year were nearly IS. 000. 900 less than
in the corresponding period of 1901. The
aggregate for the first six months was
only $1,0OO,0 600 under the first half of
1901. This remarkable difference be
tween the two periods was largely due
to the Paterson and Waterbury confa-
grations in February.
There was only one month in which
the fire losses exceeded the S2O, 900 COZ
mark. In February the Paterson fire /
caused over $1,000, 900 damage. while in
Waterbury more than s.. 600 600 worth of /
property was destroyed In the year /
1901 there was only one $50, 000, 600 month, |
and that was when the total Jumped up (
by the so, 500, 600 conflagration in Jack /
sonvtIIe- IN 1900 there were two months.
each of which showed losses in excess
of 500, 900, 000 In April of that year the /
Ottawa aud Hull fire destroyed nearly I.
$l3.000,000 of property, and in June the /
North German Lloyd pier fire in Hobok- |
en- contributed a loss of Sc. 500, 600.
Except the Paterson and Waterbury
fires, the worst fires in 1862 were at At
lantic City on April 3, estimated at
$l,500,0O0 damage. and the loss Of 5000
Geo on the Armour plant at Chicago.
While in 1900 the abnormal loss was
due largely to the Hobo en- and Ottawa
and Huh fires, the recoT 2 Of 1901, which
was unusually heavy, was due 10 an
abnormal number of fires.
NoyembeT's losses ran I'D unexpect-
eddy high OF the gain would have been
still greater. The record for the ten
months ending October was fully SI1.-
100000 lighter than the CORRESPONDING
ten months of 1901.
The year was more favorable for the
fire insurance companies than any Of
the preceding three years. There were
two considerations for this. There we're
several bad fires. notably that at At
lantic City. in which much of the prop
erty destroyed was wholly or largely
without insurance. While the property
loss at Paterson was over 81, O00, 600. the
underwriters paid something like So 600 70
COO. The Waterbury insurance loss was
about $3.50. 600 smaller than the property
loss
The other favorable factor was the al
most universal advance in fire insur-
ance rates throughout the country. The
advance ranged from 20 per cent to 100
per cent. in proportion TO the character
OF the hazards covered, and were the
result Of the disastrous record of the
previous four years. The trouble began
IN 1898 with a series of rate wars. start
ing with the dissolution of the Tariff
Association Of New York So unprodt-
able did underwriting become that many h
insurance companies withdrew from the
field in 1901. Instead of these retire
ments continuing last year, 1902 wit
messed the revived activity of LIoyds
concerns and the surplus line cOmpanfes {
that did large business before 1898. ,