Page images
PDF
EPUB

signed to cope with the fire danger in cities. For this reason we find the primitive companies such as the Union and the Sun supporting private fire brigades and advertising the advantages of the facilities for extinction which they offered. But as the municipal spirit grew in strength it was seen that the duty of fire extinction was one for the whole community and not merely for that part which was sufficiently prudent to insure. Hence we find that at present the fire brigades are in the hands of municipal authorities-though in one or two cases, notably in London, the fire insurance companies contribute towards their cost. The salvage of property in burning buildings is still regarded as a function which may be discharged directly by insurance companies and in London, Liverpool and Glasgow the associated tariff companies maintain salvage corps, who do much valuable direct work in minimising the losses due to fire and much more indirect work in the systematic inspection of warehouses and the classification of the different classes of risks. But although fire insurance companies do, as a matter of fact, both through their salvage corps and through the manner in which the tariff rates are drawn up, powerfully contribute to the prevention of fires this is not an essential part of their operations. Their main purpose is to distribute such losses as must inevitably occur over the community in an equitable manner.

MUNICIPAL FIRE INSURANCE.

It is desirable to keep an open mind on matters of business and to realise that fire insurance does not necessarily require any insurance companies for its conduct. There is no reason, in theory, why the State or municipalities should not themselves supply the machinery by which fire losses are spread over the community, and there is, as the reader may be aware, a movement on foot to extend in this direction the duties of municipalities both in Great Britain and in America. There is also no reason why groups of property owners should not combine in order mutually to protect one another, and there are some instances in which these mutual companies or clubs do afford protection and conduct their operations successfully. They are more numerous and powerful in marine than in fire insurance. But mutual associations of owners, however successful they may be in certain industries, do not meet the general wants of the community and form brilliant exceptions to the general rule that fire insurance can only be conducted satisfactorily and cheaply by competing joint-stock companies which can command the best skilled assistance which is available, and can devote their whole attention to the one object of carrying on fire insurance profitably. Men work best where their personal financial interests are involved; gratuitous labour is generally inefficient.

Some of my readers may not be aware that when fire insurance first began in this country it was for a time quite on the cards that municipal corporations would take over this branch of activity. As soon as Dr. Nicholas Barbon's Fire Office-the first jointstock fire insurance company in London-had started its operations it met with fierce opposition from the Corporation of London. The Corporation in 1681Barbon's Office was founded in 1680-drew up a scheme which was clearly modelled on that of Barbon and actually received 1670 proposals for fire insurance on buildings within the city. The Fire Office retorted by going one better in the matter of insurance premiums and announced its determination to go on cutting rates indefinitely: "They do further declare, that they will alwayes set their price under the City". The Corporation's scheme was in force for two years only and was then abandoned principally because it was more than doubtful whether they had legal powers to do the business. In 1682 the City Chamberlain was instructed to repay the premiums which had been deposited on the contracts-which were made for terms varying from one to a hundred years and to cancel the policies. But policies were in fact issued until the spring of 1683 and only ceased altogether when an application was made to the King's Bench for a Mandamus. This episode, trifling as it may now appear after 200 years, was really most important since the failure of the city of London in its enterprise determined the question whether fire insurance should develop on the competitive lines which we know and as an ordinary business or should merely be one of the forms of municipal enterprise. And I must say that this was an uncommonly fortunate thing both for insurance companies and for the community at large. No municipality, even that of London nowadays, is large enough to provide an area for the full working of the laws of average and a single serious conflagration might at any time run away with the accumulations of many years. It might even happen in the case of a very heavy loss that the municipality would not be able to meet the claims out of its specific fire funds and then the remedy of the insured would be difficult to enforce. Under the latest modern schemes of municipal insurance the public bodies aim only at providing a fund to meet the losses from fire in their own buildings, and if several municipalities are grouped together for this purpose it may happen that they will conduct the operation with success, though in the long run it may be doubted whether they will really do any better for themselves than the insurance companies could do for them.

It is of interest to observe that the Corporation of London now (in 1903) takes a very sound view of its limitations as a possible means of affording fire insurance protection to its citizens. The Corporation was approached a year or two ago by dissatisfied owners and occupiers of warehouses in Cripplegatewhere the heavy losses from fire have caused the insurance companies to frame a special tariff-and asked to undertake the insurance of buildings in the City. The answer of the Corporation-through the City Lands Committee-is most instructive and I venture to reproduce the following summary from The Times of 18th December, 1903 :—

The Corporation of London have recently been considering an influential petition from citizens, especially those connected with Cripplegate Wards, asking them to take such action as they may deem expedient to relieve them from the excessive charges now demanded by fire insurance companies, and in effect to start a system of municipal insurance of all buildings within the City area. An exhaustive report has been presented by the City Lands Committee on the subject. They stated that, as the results of the disastrous fires which have occurred recently in Cripplegate Wards, the fire insurance companies have fixed a special tariff for insuring properties in that district, which is largely occupied by what are called Manchester warehousemen. The block system of rating was applied to the congested area of Cripplegate in 1897, and had remained in force ever since, causing depreciation in the value of property in the wards and inflicting a heavy burden on traders. It had been urged that the chances of fire in that district had been greatly reduced by the rebuilding which had taken place since the Cripplegate fires, but though the new buildings were individually less inflammable than the old, it must be admitted that the opportunities of widening streets were not fully taken advantage of. It was, indeed, questionable if the risk of conflagration had been sensibly diminished, seeing that that risk mainly depended on the width of streets and the opportunity afforded by open spaces, etc., of coping with and surrounding a fire. Despite the heavy block rates which had been enforced, the fire insurance of property in Cripplegate was not sought after by the companies, who had consistently treated all offers of such business with the greatest caution, accepting as little as possible. That was hardly to be wondered at, seeing that in the last twenty-five years claims for upwards of £4,000,000 had been paid in that district alone, and the committee could quite believe that the companies would infinitely prefer dealing with better risks at proportionately lower rates.

The committee in the course of their investigation considered several points as of primary importance. Parliamentary powers would need to be obtained before a compulsory insurance premium rate could be legally levied in the City. Such a Bill, even if ex

« EelmineJätka »