The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-04-01

a policy of food insurance. There is scarce
ly city in the land which is on a river or
small stream, and most cities are so situ-
ated, but that is confronted with a flood
hazard. The stream may be small and
seemingly insignificant. but, in case of a
cloud-burst or an unprecedented RAINFALL
IL quickly becomes torrent. IL may quickly
return TO its banks and harmlessness, but,
In the hour or more of its carousal. IL may
damage hundreds of thousands OF dollars
worth or property. Almost every year
proves this at the expense of some city
or other. Last year Topeka and other cities
in Kansas and Missouri suffered severely.
The hazard exists almost as generally
the fire hazard and like the fire hazard can
be met with the insurance idea. There is
no reason why, some day, flood insurance
may not be feasible and a recognized neces-
sity.
In the case of Insurance Commissioner
Host, of Wisconsin, against the Equitable
Life Assurance Society to compel that COM
pany 10 distribute it's surplus among its
policy holders the Circuit Court at Mad
ison last week rendered decision against
the company. The case will now go TO the
Supreme Court and. if sustained there, will
result in a revolution in the methods of a
number Of large life insurance companies.
The Equitable has a surplus of over $1,000
600. About 100000 belongs to Wisconsin
policy holders. The SURPRISES OF all life
companies aggregate about s300.Oo0.Oo0 The
contention of the Wisconsin commissioner
is that, according to the law of his State.
a company must distribute its surplus &C.
cumulations at least as often as every five
years or oftener. AS to how this excess
premium payment (Which is known as sur
plus and, when returned to policy holders,
dividends) shall be paid is determined by
the terms of the contract or policy. Many
policies provide for no dividends at ALL
These are known as nonparticipating poll
cies and are largely sold because OF their
lower premium together with the certainty
as to results. There can be no disappoint-
ment as to the outcome OF such a policy in
the way of estimated dividends. based on
the company's past experience, which may
not be repeated in the future. There are
other policies which return each year 10
their holders the amounts which IL is dis
covered in excess OF the actual needs
OF the company TO meet its obligations.
There are other policies which make this
distribution every five years. And finally
there are those which make no distribution
until the policy has run for the number OF
years for which IL was written. In case OF
the death of the holder his heirs get only
the face OF the policy and not the dividend
accommodations well. If he lapses his
policy he forfeits his dividends. Only those
who retain their contracts until their ma
turity share in the dividends. Policies OF
this class have SOLD largely because il was
held out 10 the purchasers tnat, III they held
out 10 maturity they must receive large re-
turns for not only would they receive their
proportion of the dividends. but share in
all the dividends of their fellow policy
holders who dropped out by death lapse.
The stake has looked tempting and many
thousands have taken the chance. This has
naturally built up large SURPRISES for those
companies writing such policies. There
have been many sharp criticisms. however
of the plan and il now seems probable that
these objections are likely TO take form in
NNfecOn III least i'm IFS further nrOhibf-
ton and a compulsory distribution of the
vast pool