The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1916-03-18

-r ..d>
-
said that the companies might cancel.
F. H. MeMaster. insurance commits
sione5 was requested to address the
meeting. He said that he was not a
politician and was without political
ambition; he said that he was not per.
sonally interested financially In insu-
rance. -
He said that in 1909 he was present..
cd with bill to drive out the q. e.
U. A.. but was undecided: similar
measures were presented to him in fol-
lowing years, but these. too. he put
aside. He said that the 1912 bills
"killed by the insurance companies"
provided for competition. He told of
the bills introduced through him in
1915, the bill Of the National conven-
ton Of insurance commissioners.
II had absolutely nothing to do with
Mr.. Laney's bill." he declared. "His
bill and my bill were considered at tho
same time; my bill was reported fa-
vorably and was not, think, opposed
by the agents. The Laney bill con-
tanned a provision contradictory to my
own, to which / had become con-
vertad only altar mature thought. /
was accused Of e., oring the 8. 2. U. A.
by my bill; who fought that bill:
Senator McLaurin, the independent
companies of Greensboro and others
fought that bill. It provided that
every company licensed in this State
DIN q rating bureau.
''The Laney bill. much to my sur
prise. passed the senate almost with
out opposition: It had been reported
without accommodation. The house
by an unprecedented action referred
the Laney bill to the committee on
agriculture and took 1t away from the
committee on banking and insurance.
There has been continual effort
to put the 8. 3. U. A. out of the
State" Mr.. McMaster said. The
companies did not withdraw before,
why do they do 80 now? II the bill,
/ told the governor. did away with the
irritation against the 8. q. U. A. Il
would serve good purpose"
Mr.. McMaster told Of the matter ,f
insurance In the courts. Mr.. McAas-
ter went into discussion OF the pro-
visions OF the bill, reiterating his state
ment Of Friday In constituting the act.
II do not pretend to make insur-
ence rates." said Mr.. MoMaster, who
pointed out that no company could be
forced to insure risk. He went INFO
the difference In rates given by the
r. I. A. and the 8. d. u. A. mo In
+surance commissioner can declare a
rate unjust without oonnparing Il with
rates on similar hazards" he said, He
defended the anti-rebate feature, COM
pairing It with the similar provisions,
section seq, Of the criminal code, re-
SSroipS i4le insurance.
d Mr.. McMaster said that local agents
could get together to determine the
method Of payment Of premiums on
essentially the same hazards. This
construction Of the law was question
ed by ME-. Walker. Mr.. McMaster said
that many companies took the moral
hazard into consideration.
! Mr.. McMaster said that It is TOO
early In the game to know where we
are"
4 Mr., McMaster denied having any
thing to do with the provision ex-
cmpting the warehouse commission
from the act. &s
! He pointed out that hls under
standing is that the companies will
be allowed to adjust losses without
embarrassment in the performance Of
their legal contracts sster April /.
He said that he had taken up the
matter with the attorney general.
| "Mr. McLaurin will have to speak
Tor himself" said Mr.. McMaster, ON
being asked about the warehouss
commissioners promise to care for
all insurance
Mutual insurance, property man.
aged Is about the cheapest kind.
said Mr.. McMaster. who said, how.
ever, that he did not know what all
Insurers are going to do.
/ =. H. Poulnot Of Charleston. a
merchant. brought up the question
OF msrcantale risks, It was pointed
out that niutuals take only certain
selected risks.