The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-01-10

T&XS1t conversation being Whetner the
S buildings of a city were i'm
proved after fire had occurred or not.
The conversation had been prompted by the
burning of the First Baptist Church early
last Sunday morning, and had finally drift
ed into the general Improvement in the
buildings erected in the place OF the ones
destroyed by fire. In the party was we'll
known insurance man, who understood this
subject much better than the others. and in
the course of his conversation he said:
IT have been in the fire insurance bust
ness for a number of years. and have con-
sequently seen a number of large fires, both
in this city and out of it. Different from
most insurance men, l have watched very
closely the buildings that have replaced the
ones burned, and have always found that
they are a great improvement In every way
over the old ones burned. This, of course,
Is only according to the natural law OF
things, for a new building would necessar-
ily be an Improvement over an old one,
but have seen instances where buildings
that had only been constructed for three or
four years burn down, and the ones that
replaced them were much superior, both in
material and construction"
One of the crowd ventured the remark
that no doubt the reason of this was that
the insurance received for the destroyed
building had greatly aided the new one
financially.
Now that is just where most people are
mistaken" replied the insurance man. I'm
the majority of cases the insurance money
does not pay for one-half of the newly con-
structed building People are under the i'm
preston that If man owns a building on
which he has a large insurance, and il
burns down, after which he erects a new,
first-class building. in which there are all
of the latest improvements, that the insur-
ance company pays for it. On the con-
trarys the truth is the new structure costs
twice as much the amount of the insur-
ance received for the old one.
Another reason that improvements al
ways follow a fire is that as long as a
building stands safely and can be occupied
the owner will seldom tear it down He
often realizes that an improvement is neces-
sary, but will keep putting it off from year
to year. Often he will remodel the build
ing, but this is never as satisfactory as 10
have ii constructed from the ground up 1
will say, however, that the citizens of In
danapolis are more enterprising I'm improv-
ing buildings without having them burn
down than those OF any city / know Of
There are number Of instances here where
structures have been torn down that were
in fairly good condition, but they were Of
the old style and lacked the modern con-
veniences that the up-to-date buildings
have. Take. as an illustration OF this, Mas
sachusetts avenue from New York 10 Penn
sylvania streets. On the east side there
used TO be a row OF very old and rough
looking buildings Many people who passed
them daily thought that they were on the
verge OF falling down. but 1 will say that
they were in a better condition than they
looked The owners OF those structures
tore them down, and in their places built
number OF very imposing blocking blocks.
Now IL that had been In some cities those
old shacks would have been left there until
they were destroyed by fire"
A POSSIBLE ADVANTAGE.
Someone remarked that II was then an
advantage for a city to have big fire once
in awhile.
Yes" remarked the insurance man,
that Is IL the fire occurs In a part Of the
city where Improvement in the buildings Is
needed. We notice this right here with the
90