The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1920-02-14
FRIENDS Of THE
CONTINUED from Page One)


as provided in the bill. but they recog-
nize the fact that only strong COM
panies with ample assets are able to
carry their own insurance. and that
companies operating with small cap
ital or ukou borrowed capital are un-
able to produce the necessary securi-
ties or give the necessary bonds to
meet the just requirements Of the
commission. For this reason the pres
ent law bears most heavily upon those
financially weak.
MASS OF FIGURES
"A great mass of figures has al
ready beon introduced before the
committees Of the senate and house
showing the actual results to partic-
ular employers under the existing law
and also showing in closely APP
proximate way the result in the state
as whole.
1T is shown by figures obtained
from the industrial commission that
if all the--self insurers in the state
had carried insurance In the stock
companies the premiums paid by
them during 1919 would have
amounted to $1.f25,775oo while the
actual benefits and accrued TO the
employees of these self insurers
amounted to only $4,000.
ut was also shown from the same
source that the premiums actually
paid by employers in the state during
1919 to the stock companies amounted
to 1,5S5.0o0 and the total benefits
paid and accrued TO their employees
by the stock companies amounted to
$521.000. In other words, II all the
employers in the state had insured
in the stock companies, they would
ha a maid Inv IN,
s2,710.7T5, whilc the total benefits
paid and accrued to all employees
amounted to s771.00n. It will thus
be seen that If all the employers in
the state had insured with the stock
companies, there would now remain
in the hands OF those companies ST.
929, IT'S. These figures were criticized
by the insurance company representa-
tives upon the ground that they were
not accurate. but were merely esti-
mates. The fact is that the only ell
ement OF uncertainty in these figures
il the amount of accrued liability.
and from the data in possession Of the
Industrial commission. the above es-
Inmates OF these accrued liabilities
were made on basis liberal enought
to cover any reasonable contingencies
SO these figures may be accepted 8
approximately correct. The ! stock
companies could. if they desired, give
the exact figures as to their total liza
bilitfes.
$50 far as individual experiences
are concerned, it was shown that one
self insurer in the state, had il in
sured in the stock companies would
have paid $s1, 1879. while its actual
liabilities incurred were cash paid
outs l1,425, and accrued claims 81
3U2.73. thus saving nearly 100000
COMPARISONS
Another company, a lumber com
pany operating mills in Virginia and
West Virginia. was shown to have
paid in Virginia in 1919. on total
payroll of 100000, the sum OF s27.-
600 in premiums, while it's payment
in West Virginia. under exactly the
$439.954, was s2,72770 Another
lumber company operating in West
Virginia on a total payroll OF $780,
SOP, actually paid s4.777.30. In
other words. the rates of these two
companies in West Virginia were re-
spectively So cents and rs cents per
500 payroll, while In Virginia the
rates were. tramming s6.41, woods
1910, sawmill s3.70, lumber yard
s1.71. Office cents.
Supporters OF the bill further
biHhC tlit tudl inc opposition
developed in the hearings before the
joint committees does not represent
the real sentiment of the business in
terests of the state, for the reason
that the protests were largely OBJ
tanned by making misleading repre-
sensations. In support of this con-
tention they point to the fact that the !
chief spokesman in opposition to the
bin was one Mr.. c. Edwin Michael. |
of Roanoke. Virginia, who read to the |
committee the following telegram
which he said was voluntarily sent
out:
Roanoke, Virginia.
February 4. 1920 /,
| am anxious TO obtain auth critic |
as to which industrial in |
terests of our state are favoring or !
a state insurance fund /,
under the Virginia compensa tton act /
VIII you not have immediate CON /
ference with the leading industr Ia lists !
Of Nours Gonna unity sud wire ssse !
whether they favor monopolstic I
state insurance fund or whether they |,
desire to retain the privilege of in-l
surfing their liability under the act as |
now provided. Your immediate ac- |
ton and advice will be much appre- |
ciated.
tSignod) c. EDWIN MICHAEL. !
~ The batch Of letters and te]egrams
elected by the foregoing question
and read by Mr.. Michael before the I
committee. opposing monopolistic I
state insurance, mean nothing in the !
consideration of the pending bill, I
Their number might have been in I
had he asked the same ques- /
ton OF the supporters of the Bit, for
they. also. are opposed to monopolis-
tic state insurance. However, he
asked one question and used the nm