The Brookings register. [volume] (Brookings, Brookings County, S.D.) 1903-1971, 1919-05-01
STAT HAIL INSURANCE

SO many inquiries have been sent
TO w. n. Van Camp, state commissions
er Of insurance, about the hail insur-
anCe law, that he has issued the fol
some of the items that have caused
question in the minds of our farmers.
We publish it for the benefit Of our
farmer readers:
Il have your letter in which you
ask if, in my judgment, a farmer
should cary hail insurance in the
State Fund for the 1919 season. |
have given this matter a great deal
of thought and consideration and re-
alizing, as | do, that you farm a con
siderable acreage and that the insur-
ance premium is a matter of some
moment and unless you feel justified
you would hesitate in obligating your
self to pay it.
ITO make a concrete case. let us
take into account the sowing Of 100
acres of wheat. Wheat on the mar
ket at the present time is worth 1925
per bushel; seed wheat such as you
calculation $3.50 per bushel. You
SOW at least Ia bushels to the acre,
so that the seed alone for an acre of
wheat would approximate $40. Add
to this the cost of blowing, or $500
per acre, and $100 an acre for drill
ing and dragging the ground and you
have already invested in your land
$6.12, to say nothing of rental. Only
two things can prevent you from get
ting returns from this expenditure of
time and money-drouth or hail. You
can eliminate one Of these conditions
by paying a small premium into the
State Hail Fund of 35c per acre, in
your particular Or, in other
words, taking into consideration 100
acres of crop you can get 100000
protection IN your investment Of
1912, so far as hail is concerned by
paying $35 or 3h%, for insurance in
the State Hail Insurance Fund a
much lower rate than has ever been
made tC the farmers Of any state for
hail insurance.
The farmers of the state paid out
in the last seven years for hail in
surance the sum of $5,723, 310.86, re-
ceiving in return in the same time
S3,327, 285.15; in 1913 the farmers
paid for hail insurance in South Da-
kota $1.577,217.27, and received back
IN losses 1868, 500 As, which was $780,
924.12 less than they paid in premiums
on about one-seyenth Of the cultivated
land of the state. The large expendi-
ture for insurance premiums led to a
vote on the question Of whether the
state should provide hail insurance to
the farmers at cost or not and it was
decided by a vote Of approximately
two to one that the state eliminate
all possible overhead expense and fur
the state at actual cost.
MY attention has been called TO
parties who, through selfish interests,
are asking the farmers to exempt
themselves from the state hail insur
ance law, giving as n of their main
reasons hat state hail insurance in
North Dakota has not been success
full. There is 40 comparison between
the North Dakota law and the South
Dakota lag. Nnder the North Da-
kota law the farmer was compelled to
pay cash in advance which sometimes
necessitated his borrowing the money
10 pay the premium; o did the
North Dakota law provide for pay
ment of the losses in full. while the
South Dakota law provides for pay
ment of 100c on the dollar. Some in
surance agents, we arc informed, have
in their possession exemption blanks
furnished them by certain of the COM