The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-03-29
City N eWs
INSURANCE men
DEFEND AGENTS
MINNEAPOLIS UNDERWRITERS
ADDRESS COMMITTEE.
Practical Workers Find Much to Criti-
CHE in Proposed Legislation and Go
Into Case in Detail-Object in Par
ticu1ar to Clause Relating to Com
pensation Of Agents.

pensation of Agents.
\ Agents and the agency system of SELL
ing life insurance are defended in an
open letter from the Minneapolis AssO-
citation of Life Underwriters to the
insurance investigating committee OF
New York.
The committee intrusted with this
work by the association has gone care,
fully into each detail of the subject and
presents figures which show that not
only is the agency system the founda-
ton of the insurance business, which
would never have grown to it's present
proportions without it, but that 1T
works for economical management and
for the protection of the insured. After
gested, the letter takes up section SO Of
the proposed New York insurance law,
relative to agents and their compensa-
ton and protests vigorously against it.
The provision prohibiting compensa-
ton for renewals is the object Of a
special protest. The letter points out
that under the renewal system the
agent has a personal interest in seeing
that policies remain in force and thus
is practically attorney for the insured
to protect his interests. i.
Breach of Comfy.
The letter ends with the following
protest against what it terms; a breach
Of Interstate comfy in the enactment
of the proposed law:
"Finally, we would urge upon your
committee that in general the PROPOSE
ton for one state to prescribe the. Gle.
tails of the interior management of
companies domiciled in other states is a
departure from the wise and salutary
principle of proper comfy between
states, which has obtained thruout the
United States during the last genera
tions. Such step would seem especially
unwise on the present occasion, because
the investigation by your committee
upon which your recommendations must
be based has thus far been limited al
most entirely to the companies domi
ciled in New York, and you do moi
claim to be equally familiar with the
conditions Of companies domiciled il
| other states which you have not in
| vestigated. We cannot doubt but that
! your committee will agree that before
such legislation is attempted you shoul(
| be familiar with the condition ant
practices Of the companies affected, ant
especially that you should know how
far your recommendations will harmon
ize with the legal requirements in tn
state Of their domicile9
will concede that such an investigated,
on your part should -precede any at
tempt to formulate laws for the com
panies of other states, but even afte
such an investigation were completed
there would still remain the question o
the wisdom Of invading the prope
province of sister states.
Duty of State to State.
Gin our opinion it is the duty of tn
legislature of each state to make law
for the government Of its own peopl
and its own corporations. In the dis
charge Of that duty it should protec
its people against wrong doing by an
corporation of any other state. bu
every state owes to every other the re
for so many generations under tn
principle aforesaid, of the prope
comfy between states.
/ sEIn conformity with this well settle
doctrine every state has heretofore reg
ulated the interior or domestic affair
of it's own insurance companies, an
such regulation has been accepted b
other states. Every state has mad
and enforced rules of a general chara,
ter with which corporations of othe
states must comply before they can /
state should prescribe the detaile
management not only of it's own con
panies but of the companies of otht
states is not only new, but revolution
airy and such an action by the legi
lature of New York cannot be justifie
unless the legislature has reason
think that the Legislatures or the insu
ance departments or companies of otht
states have done something. or al
about to do something, which $50 TO
feits the confidence Of the people {
New York that the people Of New Yo1
are compelled to withdraw that respe,
for other states (which has obtaine
hitherto since the foundation of O,
government. r. *..ss 49, .--.. d.
Law Works Injury. -. -
Gin this connection we would ca
your attention to the amendment
section SO, in which the customary, +
ciprocal or retaliatory provisions Of tt
insurance code are named. That Sc
ton states that companies from 9TH
states shall be refused the privilege
doing business in New York whenev
a properly organized and solvent Ne
York company is prevented from doi1
business in the said states Your col
mittee cannot fail to expect other stat
to follow the example Of New York.
this respect, and therefore the result
measures of this kind would be to co
fine the business of each United Stat
. insurance company to the state of don
Gle or at most to a few states in viii
the insurance code happened to be {
most precisely the same.
eve cannot. believe that your col
mittee desires any Of the unfortuna
results described herein, and we belle,
that before the bills now before "
are favorably reported these iniurio
, provisions will be eliminated. r
specially yours,
. .HThe Minneapolis Association
Life Underwriters, by. V. H. Van Slyl
, j: e. Meyers, G. W. Van Tuy1, B.
Timberlake, S. A. Stockwell, I. Kau
mann, F. M. Joyce, Committee
, BLUES GIVE A SHOW