The Washington herald., 1921-01-12
NO GOOD EXCUSE
FOR NOT TAKING
OUT INSURANCE
Even Those Now Rich
May Need Its Help
AT Any Time.

Two representatives of the Con-
necticut Mutual Life, C. G. Leffel,
district agent at Sioux City, Ia. and
j. ElericB willing, Philadelphia,
have answered the objection often
made by insurance prospects. II
own sufficient property and do not
require insurance" and both are
printed in the current number of
"Conmutopics."
Before sitting down to write a
short article on this subject says Mr..
Leffel. Il stepped into the First Ma
tional Bank of our city and asked
the president of the institution
whether in his experience as a
banker. he had known of cases
where apparently men had made
their investments in as substantial
form as it is possible to make
them and where, through force OF
circumstances existing outside of
the individual or through some dis
ability or the sudden death of the
owner, a part or all of the invest
ments were lost or sacrificed.
His reply was. Yes, have known
of dozens of such cases and the man
who objects to life insurance upon
such grounds Is either foolish or
ignorant. He then cited a case of
a man who owned a large amount
of Iowa land, and where on ac-
count of his sudden death the last
payment could not be met The
property was sold at forced sale,
bringing only a small fraction of
its value. A substantial amount of
life insurance would have taken
care OF the balance due on the prop
erty, permitting the same to re-
main as a family estate.
Cash Not Mt Hand.
The present Federal and State
Inheritance taxes constitute another
forceful argument to be used to
meet the above objection. Even If
property is owned absolutely free of
Indebtedness. when death of the
owner occurs it frequently happens
that there is not sufficient cash on
hand to pay funeral and doctors
bills, current living expenses of the
family, and the inheritance taxes
which must be paid in cash within
fifteen months of the decedent's
death.
The bank officer also stated that
his bank frequently requires bor-
rowers to take out forty or fifty
thousand of life insurance to give
additional protection to their loans.
although owning property having
much greater value than the amount
OF the loans. The market value of
most kinds of property has greatly
deprecated during the last few
months, and 1t is apt to be impos-
sible to make a sale except at "a
substantial loss. In many cases.
where death or disability of the
property owner occurs, necessary
cash can only be realized by a sacri-
fee sale. with the unfortunate re-
suit that the efforts of a mans life
time may be largely wasted.
Many more valid arguments could
be advanced to meet the objection
to life insurance cited in the head
ing to this article"
Mr.. Jones. a man who owns con-
siderable property is undoubtedly in
very happy position" says Mr..
willing. Il do not know the extent
of your property holdings, but let
us suppose that you own three large
office buildings; would you for one
minute consider carrying fire insur-
ance on two of these buildings and
allowing the third to go uninsured?
W N.Y. NO. YOU certainty 90 not WISH
to take any unnecessary chances of
losing anything you consider of value
and which will cost you money to
replace. Such property, in the event
of loss by fire, could be replaced as
long as you are alive and retain
your earning capacity, and you in
sure 1t because 1t is valuable.
Should Protect Family.
Your life is also valuable to your
family. not alone from a sentimental
standpoint, but because of the in
come they derive from your efforts
during your lifetime and good
health. You should carry sufficient
life insurance to assure your family
the same income after your death
that they are accustomed to receive
while you are living. Without life
insurance this income is lost 10
them with your death. or loss of
earning capacity, and 1t is certainly
not your desire that their standard
Of living be decreased when it is
possible to provide for a continua-
tion of this income to them"