THE GENERAI. CONDITIONS OF INSURANCE AGAINST FIRE 47 



believe the result will be attained unless it be by co-operation and to attain 

 this a standard policy should be adopted by all mutual fire and windstorm 

 insurance companies...* Comparatively few mutual companies classify risks... 

 I have encouraged for several years a lower rate of premium — but without 

 success as 3'et — in the company that I represent on property that is pro- 

 perly protected by hghtning rods... 



The diversity which obtains in policies was illustrated during a discus- 

 sion on the insurance of town property by farmers' companies. The old 

 prejudice against insuring town and village property on the same plane 

 as farm pro])erty is fast disappearing. In towns there are better and more 

 quickly attainable facilities for fighting fires. Detached town dwellings 

 are liable to be less heavily insured than improved and completely stocked 

 farms. Such a farm is so valuable that insurance on it is easily written 

 above the legal limit. That town property is not so readily destroyed as 

 farm property is proved by the fact that some old line companies charge 

 the higher rate for farm property. 



The mutual companies follow individual principles in the matter. 

 One insures town buildings which are separated from others by as much as 

 eighty feet. In the five years ending 31 December 1914 its losses on town 

 property were almost negligible, being only $75. The representative of 

 another compan^^ stated at the meeting that his experience of twenty years 

 had taught him that small villages gave better risks than farms, but he 

 objected to insurance in large towns. Another company insures village pro- 

 perty separated by 100 feet from other buildings, and yet another village 

 property so separated by 25 feet. One company at first insured only houses 

 situated 100 feet from other buildings but has reduced this interval suc- 

 cessively to 50, 30 and finally 15 feet. Similarly some companies insure 

 motor-cars and farm machinery while others refuse to do so. One company 

 insures motor-cars as farm machinery for two thirds of their value in the 

 first year, one fourth less in the second year, one fourth less in the third 

 year, and one fourth of the original insurance in the fourth and fifth years. 

 Another company insures them at a value of not more than $ 400 and pays 

 two thirds of the appraised value if the machine is destroyed. Yet another 

 insures them for two thirds of their value in the first year and 20 per cent, 

 less in the second. 



The necessity of providing a standard insurance policy, to replace the 

 present diverse collection, is therefore evident and will gradually be re- 

 cognized by the rural population. 



Facilities for insurance are defective, and this fact together with the 

 tendency of mutual companies to assume too great risks . may have formid- 

 able consequences. There is therefore a demand for such a modification 

 of the law as will allow the farmers' mutual fire insurance companies to 

 share their surplus of risks. 



This tendency to unification and co-operation among the mutual com- 

 panies cannot fail to be to them a new and powerful factor of progress. 



