• ■•'Ml' Si 1 A == is* ■ 1 A = SOUTHERN RE( C ooi- ^ 1 » \ ■ / **;■ . ' 1 — i 5 ? 6 a 3—^1 O YFACIL u to •H o § 1 *Jt4 H|^^^^^l ^^H ^ s (0 -p ^^^^^^H U CO C ^^^^^^^H o 5J ^^^1 >H 6 0) ^^^^^^^1 ^ -p r-t ^^^^^^^M 0) P ^^H ^ c o 0) ^^^^^^1 •> PhX) ^^^^^^^H • :z> ^^^^^^^1 o X) ^^^^^^^1 c •p c ^^^1 M u o ai ^^^^^^^1 *\ a. n ^^^^^^^1 >» altimo.re Illinois Bankers, Mt. Vernon Illinois National, Springfield New England Fire, Providence New Jersey Fire, Camden, N J. Old Colony, Boston Rhode Island, Providence. West Virginia Fire, Charleston New Capital Subscribed. $100,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 : 100,000 200,000 400,000 300,000 100,000 S> ^w Surplus jbscribed. $10,000 100,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 200,00") 300,000 Totals $4,825,000 $3,660,000 Grand Totals $15,772,300 $21,284,228 Policy-holders should remember that stock-hold- ers of insurance companies have had a hard blow, and we doubt very much that they would, or, in fact, could, duplicate in the near future the remarkable record shown above if another large fire should make further contributions necessary as the alterna- tive of retirement This makes great care in the selection of insurance necessary at this time. ANALYSIS OF REASONS ADVANCED FOR NON-PAYMENT IN FULL. There cannot be any just criticism of those companies which did not pay their obliga- tions in full because of sheer inability It becomes necessary, however, to analyze rather closely the arguments advanced by various companies which were entirely able to pay in full but failed to do so. In the days im- mediately following the disaster, it was gen- erally believed that the damage by earth- quake was so great that the companies would be justified in insisting upon large discounts from the face of their policies Investiga- tion quickly dispelled this belief Mr S Al- bert Reed, Consulting Engineer of the "Com- mittee of Twenty" of the National Board of Fire Underwriters, which committee has con- sidered ever since the Baltimore fire the sub- ject of the conflagration hazard in the large cities of the United States, visited San Fran- cisco very soon after the disaster and made a report in which he stated in part: ""'The actual damage, though appalling to those who experienced the shock, was not, as a general rule, structurally serious as far as appearance went Apart from buildings having ponderon? architectural attachments, particularly the City Hall, where the dam- BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 13 age was great and spectacular, the apparent structural injury was mainly to tall chimneys, church towers and unbraced brick gables, copings and projections. Interior plaster, til- ing and adhesively applied decorations were quite generally wrecked. House chimneys above roofs fell extensively. Actual collapses were mainly confined to flimsy, frame struc- tures. Observation of the unburned western addition and also of photographs taken be- tween the earthquake and the fire make it clear that San Francisco was far from being destroyed by the earthquake, and that out- side of small districts in the flats it was the exception that a building was rendered unin- habitable." For the information of business men it should be stated that earthquake damage could properly be urged as a defence to a claim only under the following conditions: I Where the policy contained a clause distinctly providing that the company should not be liable for fire damage resulting directly or indirectly from earthquake. 2. Where a "material portion" of the in- sured building had fallen from any cause ex- cept fire, thus making the policy void. Few policies contained such clauses, and it has been conclusively proved that few of the build- ings destroyed were sufficiently damaged to bring them within the application of the "fallen building" clause The falling of a chimney or plastering cannot be considered as the falling of a substantial or material part of a building. The original intent of this clause was to provide against claims arising from the collapse of 'buildings because of structural weak" ness, and the Courts discriminate between build- ings which fall because of some inherent weak- ness and those which are demolished by some outside agency. Most of the companies which attempted to enforce large arbitrary deductions from the claims against them, however, had neither an earthquake clause nor specific evidence of earth- quake damage to urge as a defence, but insisted that the "general conditions" entitled them to the discounts demanded ranging as high as 30 14 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. per cent. We are unable to believe that there was any justification for this course, after a care- ful review of all the conditions and the evidence secured from many different sources. If the peo- ple of San Francisco had recovered the whole amount of the insurance on the destroyed prop- erty — approximately $225,000,000 — tiiey would still be out of pocket $100,000,000. The injus- tice of attempting to secure discounts from AD- JUSTED CLAIMS is, therefore, at once ap- parent. In the adjustment, all the questions bearing upon the companies' liability were supposedly considered, among them deprecia- tion from all causes, including damage, if any, by the earthquake before the fire finally de- stroyed the property. The fact that, as a whole, the destroyed prop- erty was greatly under-insured, disposes also of the allegation that many claims were "padded." With total values nearly 50 per cent, in excess of insurance, on .the average padding was im- possible. THE VITAL POINT OF THE WHOLE MATTER IS THAT THE COMPANIES WHICH EXACTED ARBITRARY DIS- COUNTS SECURED THESE DISCOUNTS NOT NECESSARILY FROM THE FACE OF THEIR POLICIES, BUT FROM THE FACE OF THE CLAIMS AFTER THEY WERE ADJUSTED AND THE ADJUST- MENT ACCEPTED BY REPUTABLE COMPANIES. To sum up. any wholesale deduction from the face of the claims as adjusted was unjustifiable. Such deductions were possible because of the pressing necessities of the claimants and the technical character of the insurance contract, which acted to deter creditors from suing. It is preposterous to assume that individual com- panies involved for millions of dollars paid their claims in full as adjusted "for the advertise- ment" or from any other motive than an im- pelling sense of justice, and the companies which exacted arbitrary discounts were with- out legal or moral justification, in the great majority of instances. New York. Febnmry 25. 1907. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 15 {See pages 48 to 6,J for details nj loss ) HOW THE COMPANIES SETTLED Percentages used in comments are of the adjusted claims. AACHEN AND MUNICH, AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, GERMANY: Paid as low as 75 per cent ; numerous settle- ments reported at 85 per cent and 90 per cent; in a few cases 95 per cent and (rarely) more Some complaints of arbitrary treatment Was able to pay in full AETNA. HARTFORD. CONN.: Paid all claims in full upon adjustment, without even cash discount Treatment of claimants cour- teous and entirely satisfactory Only four other companies settled on this basis, except a few whose losses were nommal AGRICULTURAL. WATERTOWN. N. Y.: Bulk of settlements 111 full, less 2 per cent for cash , m a few instances 5 per cent Some settlements at much heavier discounts ALLEGHENY. ALLEGHENY, PA.: Only one claim, not paid, but company states will be settled in full ALLIANCE ASSURANCE. LONDON. ENG.: At first denied liability under strong earthquake clause; later ofifered 50 per cent, or 75 per cent., according to location m damaged area. Many suits instituted. Reported that policies under $500 were settled m full. Financially able to pay m full. ALLIANCE, PHILADELPHIA. PA.: Nearly all settlement in full, less 2 per cent. ; in some cases less 5 per cent. Treatment good. AMERICAN CENTRAL. ST. LOUIS, MO.: Most claims in full, less 2 per" cent, and a few less 5 per cent. In some cases larger discounts re- ported. Treatment good. AMERICAN FIRE, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Settled nearly all claims at 50 per cent Claimed inability to pay more. Treatment courteous Set- tlements on the whole satisfactory, considering company's condition. AMERICAN, BOSTON. MASS.: Offered 40 per cent., alleging ins:>lvency Out- standing risks were reinsured, giving an appar- 16 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 4S to 63 for details of loss.) cntiy legal prcicrciicc" to return premium claim- ants over loss claimants. Action of the company has been marked by concealment and evasion. Suit now pending for appointment of receiver and to compel further payments to those who settled at 40 per cent, on the strength of alleged false representations. AMERICAN, NEWARK, N. J.: As a rule reported to have paid in full, less 2 per cent.; some larger discounts reported. Its adjusters in numerous instances gave drafts for full amount of the loss, but secured from the in- sured a check representing a discount. The com- pany states that this was done without its knowl- edge or consent and only in the early stages of the adjustments; and that in no case did the check so received exceed 2 per cent, of the claim. Treat- ment, on the vi^hole, good; a few reports of arbi- trary and discourteous treatment by adjusters. ARMENIA, PITTSBURG, PA.: Only a few claims. Reported to have sought considerable discounts. Able to pay in full. ASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA. NEW YORK, N. Y.: Demanded heavy discounts. Losses usually settled at 75 per cent. In some cases under press- ure paid considerably more. Company financially able to pay in full, though loss was heavy. Rein- sured in National of Hartford, February, 1907. ATLANTA-BIRMINGHAM, ATLANTA, GA.: Record very bad. No settlements made. First offer to settle, after five months' delay, was 25 per cent, in cash and 50 per cent, in stock of the com- pany at an absurd over-valuation. The next oflfer was 25 per cent, cash and 10 per cent, in notes, and later this was made 25 per cent, cash and 15 per cent, in notes. All these offers were rejected by the creditors. Ninety per cent, of the good assets of the Atlanta-Birrriingham were turned over by the active managers to the Prudential Fire Insurance Company of West Virginia, which was purchased in an effort to maintain the agency organization of the Atlanta-Birmingham. Later both companies went into the hands of receivers. This is one of the three American companies BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 17 (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) wMch nia4e ;io cfiofi to axjjust tbeijr claims, ajad paid nothing to their creditors. ATjUAS ASSURANCE. LONDON, ENG: J\. great majority of the company's losses paid in full with i per cent, or 2 per cent, discount; in some cases 5 per cent, discount. Only one settle- ment reported at less than 95 per cent. Treat- ment uniformly courteous. AUSTIN FIRE, AUSTIN, TEXAS: Settlements reported range from 70 per cent, to 100 per cent., the majority at about 75 per cent. Claimants appear to have realized that the coxn- paxjy's losses were very heavy in proportion to its size; but it could have paid to full, though this wxjuld have exhausted its resources. Little com- plaint regarding it is made in San Francisco, des- pite the heavy discounts. The company states that no suits have been filed against it. AUSTRIAN PLEMENTAR, VIEIslNA, AUSTRIA: Only one loss ($J,75o); settled for amount claimed. AUSTRIAN PHOENIX, VIENNA, AUSTRIA.: Has paid nothing. Denies liability, apparently without the slightest excuse. Record very bad. No losses paid. After ten months a compromise oflfer is reported. No definite information yet ob- tainable as to percentage claimants may expect to realize. Definite announcement expected shortly. BALKAN NATIONAL, SOFIA, BULGARIA.: Demanded large discounts; reported to have set- tled at about 80 per cent. Small loss; should and could have paid in full. BREWERS EXCHANGE, KANSAS CITY, MO.: Settled in full; treatment entirely satisfactory. BRITISH AMERICA, TORONTO, ONT.: In the great majority of cases claims were paid at 100 per cent., though some settlements are re- ported at discounts of 10 per cent, or l$ per cent. Jn rpany instances payment of part of the loss was deferred and term drafts issued. Practically all of these term drafts have matured and been paid. No complaints reported to .us, the settlements hav- ing given general satisfaction. Figures filed by the company show high average of settlements. Loss severe. 18 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (Sec pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) BRITISH AMERICAN, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settlements of this company similar to those of the British America of Toronto, but nearly all paid in cash. BRITISH DOMINIONS INSURANCE COM- PANY, LTD., LONDON, ENG.: Endeavored to compromise all claims; it is pos- sible that they will be adjusted by compromise without litigation. Small loss; able to pay in full. No reason for discounts. BUFFALO GERMAN, BUFFALO, N. Y.: Compromised generally at from 75 per cent, to 95 per cent. Its treatment of claimants was un- satisfactory. Its ability to pay in full is unques- tioned. BULGARIA, RUSTSCHUK, BULGARIA: Demanded large discounts; reported to have settled at about 80 per cent.; small loss; should and could have paid in full. CALEDONIAN AMERICAN, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settlements ranged from 75 per cent, to 90 per cent., the higher figure prevailing; occasional set- tlements at better figures; was able to pay in full. CALEDONIAN, EDINBURGH, SCOTLAND: Paid some claims with small cash discount, but in the main settled at about 90 per cent. No uni- formity of settlements. It is reported that settle- ments as low as 75 per cent, were made. Figures furnished 'by the company show low average of settlements. Some claimants have complained that settlements were unnecessarily delayed. CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.: Settled all claims at 100 per cent, without cash discount in most, but not all, cases. To liqui- date its losses seven assessments were paid by the stockholders of the corporation, aggregating $275 per share upon a par value of $40. Its treatment of policyholders was courteous and entirely satis- factory. CALUMET, CHICAGO, ILL.: Settled all claims of which we have any record at 50 per cent. To accomplish this a fund of $500,000 was raised by some of the stockholders of. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 19 (^See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) the company. To the creditors was given a guar- anty that if after settlement upon a basis of 50 per cent, any of this fund remained it would be dis- tributed to the creditors pro rata. No serious criticism has been made by claimants, as they cor- rectly assume that the company paid all its funds would permit; in fact, it could not have paid 50 per cent, if liquidated. It was criticised outside of San Francisco for lack of frankness regarding its condition. CAMDEN, CAMDEN, N. J.: Entire loss through reinsurance, CENTRAL, LONDON, ENG.: San Francisco correspondent reports eflfort made by the company to settle at 80 per cent., which was declined. No definite information. We have been unable to obtain from the company or its United States representatives figures showing its losses. CENTRAL MFGRS. MUTUAL, VAN WERT, OHIO: Loss only $2,500; paid in full. CITIZENS, ST. LOUIS, MO.: Settled generally in full with discount of 2 per cent, for cash. Treatment of claimants satisfac- tory. COLOGNE REINSURANCE, COLOGNE, GER- MANY: Reinsurance losses only. COLONIAL ASSURANCE, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settled some claims in full, or with ordinary cash discount, but endeavored to compromise where possible. One settlement recorded at 85 per cent. COLONIAL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANIES, BAT AVI A, JAVA: So far as known, no settlements made; losses comparatively small. Claimants were met by re- peated excuses delaying legal action. These com- panies have no deposit of funds in this country, and to enforce payment expensive suits are nec- essary in Holland or Java. 20 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. {See pages 48 to 63 for details ^f loss.) COLONIAL FIRE, WASHINGTON, D. C: Reinsurance losses only; settled satisfactorily; company in voluntary liquidation. COLONIAL UNDERWRITERS, HARTFORD, CONN.: See National Fire of Hartford, Conn. COLUMBIA, JERSEY CITY: Losses nominal; no reports as to settlementa. COMMERCIAL FIRE, HOUSTON, TEXAS: Al reinsurance of Austin Fire Ins. Co. COMMERCIAL UNION ASSIJRANCE. LON- DON, ENG.: At first denied liability, under strong earthquake clause, but later paid 50 per cent, or 75 per cent., according to location of risk, except in case of policies of $500 or less, which were settled in full. Financial responsibility unquestioned. COMMERCIAL UNION, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Had same earthquake clause as Commercial Union of London, and settled upon same basis. COMMONWEALTH, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Losses small; company claims to have paid promptly and in full. No reports filed with us COMPENSATION AND GUARANTEE FUND, LONDON, ENG.: Small loss; no payments reported; representa- tives adopted policy of delay, while not openly denying liability. CONCORDIA, MILWAUKEE, WIS.: Settled at arbitrary discounts ranging from 10 per cent, to 25 per cent; paid generally at about 85 per cent. In only a few cases were better set- tlements secured by claimants. Could have paid in full. CONESTOGA FIRE, LANCASTER, PA.: Compromised at arbitrary discounts of from 5 per cent, to 15 per cent. Small loss; no apparent rea- sons for deductions. *'CONFIANCE," PARIS, FRANCE: Small loss, paid in full promptly and without* discount BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. ,21 {See pages 48 to 6j for details of loss ) CONNECTICUT FIRE. HARTFORD. CONN.: Paid in full, or less t t^er cent or 2 per ccht for casli Treatment of policyliolfjer^ sati'^factory CONTINENTAL. NEW YORK, N Y Paid all clnims in full upon adjustment, without even cash discount Treatment of claimants cour- teous and entirely satisfactory Only four other companies settled on this basis, except a few whose losses were nominal DELAWARE. DOVER, DEL.: Settled HI full, promptly and without cash dis- count Treatment entirely satisfactory Loss srhall DELAWARE, PHILADELPHIA. PA.: Effort made to settle all claims at 75 per cent ; when ofYcr was refused and suit threatened, set- tlements were made at higher rates, in Some caSes exceeding go per cent A few soHlements rtiade at less than 75 per cent without any reason having bfeert advdhced for large discounts Considerable ci'iticism of the methods adopted by this cotnpahy and its attitude towards it? creditc^l-s Its losses were heavy, but it was ;ible to pay in full, if its published =tnfoments were correct DES MOINES, DES MOINES. IOWA: Attempted to comproniicc claims and has of- fered 75 per cent and 80 per cent One loss known to have been settled, however, at 90 per cent . another at 95 per ceht "EL DIA." SPAIN: Small loss, no information that it has paid any claims Claimants annoyed by excuses delaying legal action for many months, though this com- pany did not actually deny liability This was pos- sible because of the extreme difficulty of enforcing claims against the company, it having tio funds here whirh could be attached DUTCHESS. POUGHKEEPSIE. N. Y.: Settled practically all claims at 30 per cent., the officers claiming that if the indebtedness could be liquidated at that figure it could continue in busi- ness, but would otherwise go into the hands of a receiver It could have paid more than 30 per cent. Severely criticized for failure to answer frankly in- 22 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss. ) quiries regarding ils condition, and because of action of its directors m reinsuring in a new com- pany controlled by themselves, when reinsurance elsewhere would have left more for creditors. DUTCH UNDERWRITERS, HOLLAND: These policies are now issued, in this country through Johnson & Higgins and Weed & Kennedy Policies were formerly issued through McCay & Cortis Company, but they no longer represent these compapies Some claims on policies issued through them arc still unpaid; policy-holders com- plain that they could not secure any satisfaction regarding them Weed & Kennedy state that they had no conflagration losses on Dutch Underwrit- ers* policies, and Johnson & Higgins report that they have collected and paid in full all claims on policies issued through them Our direct infor- mation verifies this EAGLE FIRE COMPANY, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Withdrew from California and endeavored to compromise generally at 75 per cent. A large number of claims were settled on that basis, but a few were paid on more favorable terms. Many claimants sued it rather than accept 75 per cent Its arbitrary attitude caused much dissjatisfaction and severe criticism. Its gross loss, less reinsur- ance, was about $850,000, and its combined capital and surplus at the time of the fire about $700,000 With additional funds paid in soon after the fire, it was able to pay all cla*ms in full; no apparent justification for large arbitrary discounts exacted. Is now offering 90 per cent. EASTERN FIRE, ATLANTIC CITY, N. J.: y^pparently adopted attitude of trying to tire claimants in order to force compromise. No set- tlements known to have bean made thus far on direct policies. Part of loss through reinsurance of German of Freeport; not yet paid. EMPIRE CITY, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Endeavored to compromise at 75 per cent.; fig- ures furnished by company indicate higher aver- age on settlements. Complaints of arbitrary and discourteous treatment. ENGLISH AMER. UNO'S. HARTFORD: See London & Lancashire Same settlement. EQUITABLE F. & M., PROVIDENCE, R. L: Reinsurance of Fireman's Fund; settled in bulk. __ BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORTt 23 (^See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) EQUITABLE FIRE UNDERWRITERS, CHI- CAGO. ILL.: A "wildcat" Lloyds concern, not known to have settled the small loss ($2,000) reported to us. EQUITY, TORONTO, ONT.: Offered small percentage in compromise settle* ment of claims. Able to pay in full. Loss small. One large claim paid at gz^k per cent. EUREKA FIRE & MARINE. CINCINNATI, OHIO: Reinsurance only; states ihat it has settled or will settle on same basis as original company. "EUROPA," BERLIN. GERMANY: Two small losses; settled promptly and in full without discount. EUROPEAN UNDERWRITERS, LONDON, ENG.: An aggregation of twelve companies issuing a single policy. One company, the Austrian Phoe- nix of Vienna, denied liability under these poli- cies, as it did under its direct policies. (See item elsewhere.) The other companies appear to have settled promptly and liberally. One small claim was contested because of alleged material misrep- resentations in the application. EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY. LTD.. LON- DON, ENG.: No direct policies; reinsurance only. FACTORS, MEMPHIS. TENN.: Only one loss; settled on compromise basis ac- cepted by the assured from other companies of like standing, in preference to litigation! FACTORY MUTUAL, CLEVELAND, OHIO: Small loss; no report as to settlement. FARMERS & MERCHANTS, LINCOLN, NEB.: One loss reported, which was settled at 90 per cent, of adjustment. FEDERAL, JERSEY CITY, N. J.: A number of claims paid at discounts of 2 per cent, to 5 per cent; some others at discounts of 10 per cent. General average of settlements as indi- 2i BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See Images 48 to 63 tor details of loss.) catcd by figures furnislicd by the company to us IS low Able to pay in full Reinsured in Na- tiojial of Hartford. February, 1907 FEDERAL LLOYDS, CHICAGO, ILL.: Compromised claims at from 75 per cent, to 95 per cent.; average a little over 80 per ceijt. of amount claimed Able to pay in full. "FIDELITAS," BELGIUM: Paid its few losses in full. FIDELITY UNDERWRITERS, CHICAGO, ILL.: A "wildcat" Lloyds; no settlement reported FIRE ASSOCIATION, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Most claims paid at discounts of 5 per cent to 15 per cent. A few claims paid at larger discounts. Its earlier efforts to settle at 75 pc/ cent, caused considerable criticism. A strong company, and able to pay in full. FIREMAN'S FUND, SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.: The company was made insolvent by the fire and settled with creditors by an agreement to pay in instalments, 50 per cent, in cash, the balance in stock of the company, to be taken at a valuation of $500 per share. Settlement was accepted by practically all of the claimants. The stock taken in part payment at $500 per share will be worth at least $150 per share after the readjustment of the company's finances; so that the settlemcjit is practically on a 65 per cent, basis, plus any future profits which may be derived by the cU>irrLants from their stock hold ngs. Losses were very heavy, and settlement under the circumtances sat- isfactory FIREMAN & MECHANICS, MADISON, IND.: Compromised its few claims at from 80 per cent, to 90 per cent Able to pay in full FIRST BOHEMIAN, PRAGUE. AUSTRIA: Only two direct losses; reported paid in full, less discounts of 1% and 2% respectively. Amount, $9,000. Also had $8o,ooo^loss through reinsurance; reported settled in full FRANKLIN FIRE, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Most claims settled at arbitrary discount of 10 per cent.; some at discount of 7V per cent. Other losses are reported where greater discounts were exacted without explanation furnished as to rea- BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 25 {See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) son therefor. Others were paid at a discount of only 2 per cent or 5 per cent. It is claimed that its funds did not permit payment in full. GERMAN ALLIANCE. NEW YORK, N. Y.: Claims promptly adjusted and paid at a discount of 2 per cent, for cash. GERMAN AMERICAN, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Nearly all claims paid at a discount of 2 per cent, for cash. In some cases a larger discount taken, always for some stated reason, such as loss of books or earthquake damage. GERMAN FIRE, PEORIA, ILL.: Losses were very heavy, and were settled on the average at 50 per cent, of the amount claimed. Funds for the settlements were contributed by the stockholders. If the company had gone into liqui- dation it could not have paid 50 per cent. Criti- cised only because of its policy of concealment. The company insisted that its loss could not ex- ceed $100,000 long after it was known to be in- volved for over eight times that amount. In the main, policyholders were satisfied with the treat- ment received. GERMANIA, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Endeavored to compromise at 90 per cent., though some claims were paid upon a more favor- able basis. Undoubtedly able to pay in full. Fig- ures furnished to us by company show a low av- erage of settlements. GERMAN, FREEPORT, ILL.: Record bad. Concealed extent of its losses and published misleading advertisements, claiming a solvent condition after the facts were known. Be- cause it claimed elsewhere to be perfectly solvent, its San Francisco creditors were slow to accept its offer of 60 per cent, in compromise settlement, and the company's actions so discredited it that after a time no reliance was placed upon any of its offi- cial statements. It finally reinsured in the Royal of Liverpool on November 15, 1906, and went into the hands of a receiver (the Chicago Title & Trust Company) on November 19, 1906, owing about $3,000,000 for unpaid claims. It had previously paid out (according to a report filed under oath with the Georgia Insurance Department as of 26 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (Sec pages 48 to 6 J for details of loss.) October 31, 1906) $1,048,117.82 in settlement of claims on an avefage of 60 per cent., their face being about $1,750,000. GERMAN NATIONAL, CHICAGO, ILL.: This company was owned by the German In- surance Company of Freeport. (See item regard- ing that company.) The methods followed by the German National were similar to those of the Ger- man of Freeport. Its risks were reinsured Novem- ber 19, 1906, in the Dubuque Fire & Marine Insur- ance Company, and on November 20, 1906 (next day), the State Bank of Chicago was appointed receiver No payments made so far as known. GERMAN UNDERWRITERS, MILWAUKEE, WIS.: See Milwaukee Mechanics. GIRARD F. & M., PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Settled generally at 75 per cent., but with some claimants settlements were made at from 90 per cent, to 95 per cent. Claimants report to us that the company obtained discounts of 20 per cent, and 25 per cent, upon statement that its funds would not permit larger payments. If its losses were correctly reported by it, this is untrue. Its methods caused many complaints and severe crit- icism by policyholders. "GLADBACHER," GLADBACH, GERMANY: Compromised several claims at 80 per cent.; fig- ures indicate higher average of settlements. Small loss only; able to pay in full. GLENS FALLS, GLENS FALLS, N. Y.: Settled generally at 2 per cent, discount, though a few cases are reported of settlements at slightly larger discount. Its treatment of claimants was satisfactory. GLOBE & RUTGERS, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Endeavored to compromise generally at 75 per cent, and did settle a large number of claims at that figure. Where settlements upon that basis were declined by claimants, more favorable terms were offered and payments in a number of cases were made at a rate in excess of 90 per cent. The attitude of the company and the methods em- ployed to force compromises aroused criticism and ill-feeling on the part of policyholders. Was BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 27 {See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) able to pay in full; no apparent ji.stification of discounts exacted. GREAT LAKES, INDIAN TERRITORY: Only small loss reported; no report as to details of settlement, if any. HAMBURG BREMEN, HAMBURG, GERMANY. Offered generally 75 per cent., claiming positive instructions from Home Office, on the ground that its assets would not permit it to pay more. In some cases 70 per cent, was offered and accepted by claimants. Comparatively little criticism of these large discounts, it being generally believed that the company was honestly offering all it could pay From best information obtainable, we believe this to be true. HAMILTON FIRE, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Only a few small losses. So far as known, has paid nothing, adopting a policy of delay in order to force compromise. HANOVER FIRE, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settled generally at 90 per cent., but in a few cases secured larger discounts In some cases payments made with discounts of 2 per cent, and 5 per cent. Could have paid in full "HANSEATISCHE," HAMBURG, GERMANY.: Small direct loss; no report as to settlement. Believed involved also through reinsurance. HARTFORD FIRE, HARTFORD, CONN.: Sustained an enormous loss, greater than that of any other company (except the Fireman's Fund), because of the corresponding volume of its business Settled promptly in full, less discount of 2 per cent, for cash. Its treatment of claimants was in every respect satisfactory HOME FIRE & MARINE, SAN FRANCISCO. CAL.: Settlements followed those of Fireman's Fund of San Francisco, which owned this company and under the stockholders' liability law of California was liable for its debts. This company is in liqui- dation HOME INSURANCE BANKING AND TRUST CO., GALVESTON, TEXAS: Reported to have small loss but no data avail- able. Not known to have paid any losses for some months. 28 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) HOME, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settled promptly and in full, with small dis- counts (usually I per cent.) for cash Its treat- ment of claimants was in every respect satis- factory. HOUSTON F. & M., HOUSTON, TEXAS: AH reinsurance of Austin Fire. Paid that com- pany on its basis of settlement. ICE MANUFACTURERS EXCHANGE, KAN- SAS CITY, MO.: Paid in full and promptly. INDEMNITY EXCHANGE, CHICAGO, ILL.; Paid promptly and in full without cash discount. INDEMNITY FIRE, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Followed settlements of Norwich Union. INDEPENDENT CASH MUTUAL, TORONTO. ONT.: Reported to have a small loss, said to be set- tled at 90 per cent. INDIA MUTUAL, BOSTON, MASS.: Loss nominal; paid in full as adjusted. INDIANAPOLIS FIRE, INDIANAPOLIS, IND.: Loss entirely through reinsurance of one com- pany. INDIVIDUAL FIRE UNDERWRITERS, ST. LOUIS, MO.: Settled promptly in full, without discount. INDIVIDUAL UNDERWRITERS, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settled in full, less an agreed cash discount; $100,000 paid on account before the loss was ad- justed. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMER- ICA, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Settled in full, with discounts of I per cent, or 2 per cent for cash. Treatment of claimants satis- factory. INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA. PA.: Settled in full, or with small discount No com- plaints as to treatment 0/ rlaimants Loss small. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 29 {See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss. ) INSURANCE UNDERWRITER^ AGENCY. PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Sec Spring Garden Insurance Company. JEFFERSON FIRE, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Of two losses reported to us, one was settled at a discount of 5 per cent, and the other at 10 per cent. Company's figures indicate low average of settlement. Loss small; able to pay in full. JOHNSTOWN MUTUAL, JOHNSTOWN, PA.: No claims settled so far as we can learn. Com- pany placed in the hands of a receiver in January, 1907. Was a "wild-cat" mutual concern of no standing. KING INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., LON- DON, ENG.: Only two losses; liability denied because of earthquake clause; nothing paid to date. KINGS COUNTY, BROOKLYN, N. Y.: Lo.ss all reinsured in Atlas Assurance Company, which owns this company, and settled its losses. LAW, UNION & CROWN, LONDON, ENG.: Settled generally in full, or at discount of 2 per ceijt. for cash. In a very few cases discounts slightly larger in amount are reported. Treat- of claimants satisfactory. LIVERPOOL & LONDON & GLOBE, LIVER- POOL, ENG.: Paid all claims in full u^on adjustment, with- out even cash discount. Treatment of claimants courteous and entirely satisfactory. Only four other companies settled non this basis, except a few whose losses were nominal. Li^OYDS, LONDON, ENG.: Seems to have strictly followed the warranty company, and where such warranty company set- tled at 100 per cent., claims paid promptly and in full. Where warranty company denied liability, in whole or in part, the Lloyds underwriters followed. LONDON AND LANCASHIRE, LIVERPOOL. ENG.: Settled generally at 95 per cent., though many payments made at 97 per cent, or 98 per cent. Several others are reported at 92}/^ per cent, and ■10 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) 90 per cent., and even 88 per cent, and 85 per cent. Methods adopted by the company in forcing these discounts were frequently regarded as illiberal and exacting, causing dissatisfaction. Large and strong company, able to. pay in full. LONDON ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LON- DON, ENG.- Settled generally in full or less discount of i per cent or 2 per cent., a few cases are reported where discount of 5 per cent, was secured. Its treatment of claimants was generally satisfactory LONDON MUTUAL, TORONTO, ONT.: Endeavored to make best possible compromise with claimants. Reported to have settled from 85 per cent. up. Involved for comparatively small amount and able to pay in full. LOUISVILLE, LOUISVILLE, KY.: Losses entirely through reinsurance of the Traders of Chicago. This company states will pay at the same time and in the same manner as the Traders. MADISON, MADISON, IND.: Small loss; reported to have settled at discounts ranging up to 30 per cent. MANCHESTER FIRE, MANCHESTER, ENG.: Settled in full, or at small discount for cash. MANUFACTURERS' INDEMNITY ASSOCIA- TION, SEATTLE, WASH.: See Seattle Fire & Marine Insurance Company. MERCANTILE FIRE & MARINE, BOSTON, MASS.: Settled in full, with discounts of from i per cent. 10 5 per cent. Treatment of claimants entirely satisfactory. "METROPOLE," PARIS, FRANCE: Small loss; settled promptly in full without dis- count. MICHIGAN FIRE & MARINE, DETROIT, MICH.: Settled in full or at discounts of from 2 per cent. to 5 per cent. Treatment of claimants satisfactory. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 31 {See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) MICHIGAN MILLERS' MUTUAL, LANSING, MICH.: Losses small; settled in full, without discount. MILWAUKEE FIRE, MILWAUKEE, WIS.: No direct business. Losses all through reinsur- ance. MILWAUKEE MECHANICS. MILWAUKEE, WIS.: At the time of the conflagration this company was operating under the "Safety Fund" law of Wisconsin, under the provisions of which its assets were divided, one portion being reserved for the protection of the holders of policies on unturned property, the balance being available for the pay- ment of the conflagration losses. In accordance with this division the company settled its claims at 70 per cent, of their face. In some cases we are advised that claimants received an agreement from the company to make a further payment, should any funds remain after settling the conflagration losses. There are numerous complaints made re- garding the company's methods, though it clearly acted within its legal rights in settling on the above basis. MISSISQUOI & ROUVILLE MUTUAL FIRE, FRELIGHSBURG, P. Q., CAN.: Loss nominal; paid in full. MONONGAHELA, PITTSBURG: Small loss; no details of setttements received. MONTMAGNY MUTUAL, CANADA: Paid in full; small loss. MONTREAL-CANADA, MONTREAL, CANADA: Small loss; reported settled in full, less i per cent, cash discount. MOSCOW FIRE, MOSCOW, RUSSIA: Reinsurance losses only. MUNICH REINSURANCE, MUNICH, GER- MANY: Reinsurance losses only. MUTUAL FIRE, MARINE AND INLAND, PHILADELPHIA: This company was organized largely to insure properties of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company and its allied concerns. Its loss is nominal. 32 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 4S to 63 for details of loss.) "NADESHDA," ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA: Is known to have compromised one claim at 75 per cent, and another at 80 per cent.; several losses still unpaid. Policy of delay caused inconvenience and severe criticism. NASSAU. BROOKLYN, N. Y.: Settled frequently at 75 per cent., although set- tlements were reported, where this compromise was declined running as high as 95 per cent. Its published statements show that it was able to pay in full Claimants complain regarding treat- ment. "NATIONALE," PARIS, FRANCE: Loss small, paid in full without discount. NATIONAL FIRE & MARINE, ELIZABETH, N. J.: Endeavored to compromise at 70 per cent.; in one case is known to have paid 80 per cent. Fig- ures submitted by company show a low average. Complaints received that, treatment of claimants was unsatisfactory. Was able to pay in full; small loss. NATIONAL FIRE, HARTFORD, CONN.: The methods of this company were sharply criti- cised. The statement was made publicly, on good authority, that its adjusters were at first instructed by the company to settle no claims except at a re- duction of 25 per cent, from the amount shown to be due by the proof of loss Its president strongly advocated an agreement among the companies to compromise all claims at 75 per cent, of the face of the policies Later, the company, apparently under the pressure of public opinion, settled its losses on the same basis as other companies of similar financial responsibility. The great major- ity of its settlements were made (after the first few weeks) for the amount of the claims, less 2 per cent to 5 per cent, discount, though numerous settlements at discounts ranging up to 10 per cent, are reported The company was undoubtedly able to pay in full. Various figures were submitted by thfs com- pany in response to our request for a state- BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 33 (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) mcnt of the net amount of the policies under which claims were filed, and the net loss incurred thereon. Considerable correspondence took place in an effort on our part to straighten the mattj^er out, that justice might be done both to the com- pany and to our subscribers. Finally the com- pany, in a letter dated January 12, 1907, signed H. A. Smith, now vice-president of the National, stated that the net loss was $2,559,577.97, and that the net amount of the policies under which the claims making up that total were filed was $2,689,- 277.94; or, in other words, that the net loss in- curred was 95.55% of the net insurance involved- This is more than was paid on the average by companies which settled every claim at 100% with- out cash discount, and this company has circulated broadcast the statement that it paid about 94% of the claims against it, its total salvage, cash discounts, etc., being about 6%. It is at once evi- dent that one of the two statements quoted must be incorrect. The figures in the letter of Janu- ary 12 indicate that the company paid a greater percentage of thv. face of its policies (net) than the percentage of the claims against it formerly stated to have been paid. The company refused to modify or correct its figures, even when we sent a special messenger to Hartford to confer with it, who handed the company a written mem- orandum showing the impossibility of harmoniz- ing its various statements. Under these circum- stances, we felt compelled to leave out of our tables the figures furnished by the company. NATIONAL MUTUAL CHURCH INSURANCE CO., CHICAGO, ILL.: One small loss; paid in full. NATIONAL MUTUAL FIRE, OMAHA, NEB.: One small loss through reinsurance. Claim car- ried at its face, but not paid at latest advices. NATIONAL UNION, PITTSBURG, PA.: Settled generally at discount of 10 per cent., though a number of cases were reported where settlements were made at discounts of 15 per cent, and others where claims were paid at a discount of 5 per cent. Loss was very heavy in proportion to the company's resources; it could not have paid in full if liquidated. Settlements under the circum- 34 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See Images 48 to 6j for details uj Ion ) stances were considered satisfactory by most of the claimants, though others criticised its methods se- verely. NATIONAL UNION SOCIETY, BEDFORD. ENG.: Company's reiiresentatives state that it had but one loss, which was paid in full NEBRASKA UNDERWRITERS. OMAHA. NEB One small loss, no report as to settlement NEW BRUNSWICK, NEW BRUNSWICK, N. J.: Settled generally at 75 per cent., although a few cases are reported of more favorable settlements where this compromise was declined. Loss severe in proportion to the company's resources, but its statements show that it was able to. pay in full NEW HAMPSHIRE, MANCHESTER. N. H.: Settled generally in full or at a discount of 1 per cent or 2 per cent for cash Treatment of claim- ants Satisfactory NEW YORK & BOSTON LLOYDS, NEW YORK: Loss small; settled in full, promptly and without cash discount NEW YORK FIRE. NEW YORK. N. Y.: Settled generally at 40 per cent., claiming that its funds would not permit larger payments, though a few settlements upon more liberal terms are re- ported Has discontinued business. The some- what meagre information available indicates that it could have paid about 50 per cent or 55 per cent, by exhausting its resources. NEW YORK INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK. N. Y.: Only two claims; one (reinsurance) paid in full; the other at cash discount of about 6 per cent. NEW YORK UNDERWRITERS AGENCY, NEW YORK, N. Y.: See Hartford Fire, of which the New York Underwriters' Agency is simply a branch. NEW ZEALAND. AUCKLAND. N. Z.: As a rule paid in full, less 2 per cent, discount. In some cases secured larger cash discounts. In BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 35 (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) other cases deducted only 1 per cent. Some of the company's policies contamed earthquake clause. On such policies paid 75 per cent, or 80 per cent. Treatment on the whole satisfactory, no com- plaints filed with us. NIAGARA, NEW YORK: Paid in full, less i per cent, or 2 per cent, for cash; in some cases deducted 5 per cent. Treat- ment of claimants satisfactory NORTH BRITISH & MERCANTILE, LONDON, ENG.: Paid nearly all claims in full, less 2 per cent, for cash; in some cases 5 per cent, discount reported, and in rare cases a larger percentage. In many instances paid in full at expiration of sixty-day limit. Treatment generally excellent. NORTH BRITISH & MERCANTILE. NEW YORK, N. Y.: Small loss all through reinsurance. NORTHERN ASSURANCE COMPANY, LON- DON, ENG.: Paid nearly all claims in full, less i per cent, for cash or without discount, at expiration of 60 days. In rare instances larger discounts reported. Treatment in general excellent. NORTHERN, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Two small losses; paid promptly in full, and without discount. NORTH GERMAN FIRE, HAMBURG. GER- MANY: Denied liability, apparently without excuse. Withdrew from the United States and endeavored in every way to avoid i*^s obligations. Reported to have gone into liquidation. An agreement has been made by which all claims against this com- pany may be tried in Germany at a minimum ex- pense, and without the requirement of security for costs, which, under the law, the defendant is enti- tled to exact, and which, in the case of a foreign plaintiff, is exceedingly burdensome. NORTH GERMAN FIRE, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Has paid no claims so far as known. Claims to have made every effort to effect a compromise set- tlement. Did submit a proposition, which was re- >^6 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 6j for details of loss.) fused by the claimants. Is now in the hands of a receiver. Outstanding business was reinsured in the Cosmopolitan Fire Insurance Company, which is being operated by A. Loeb & Sons, General Agents, Chicago, who formerly operated and owned most of the stock of the North German of New York. This reinsurance transaction, at a time when the North German Fire was insolvent, is apparently legal under the New York statutes, but in effect gave a preference to those having claims against- che company for return premiums over those hav- ing claims for losses. NORTH RIVER, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settled usually at 75 per cent., but in some cases paid from 90 per cent, to 100 per cent, where the insured was able to bring pressure ta bear. Methods in adjusting seve'rely criticised. Was financially able to pay all claims in full. NORTHWESTERN FIRE & MARINE, MIN- NEAPOLIS, MINN.: Settlements ranged from 75 per cent, to 65 per cent.; in some isolated cases paid more; majority at 75 per cent. Company's methods sharply criti- cised. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL, MILWAUKEE, WIS.: Settled many claims in full, less 2 per cent, for cash. Other settlements reported ranige all the way down to 75 per cent. The company seems to have started on that basis, but later to have paid nearer the amount really due. Figures furnished by company show low average of settlements. Undoubtedly able to pay in full. NORWICH UNION, NORWICH, ENG.: This company's policies contained an unusually drastic earthquake clause, Has cofnpromised most of the claims against it at 50 per cent, or 75 per cent, according to the location of the property with relation to the earthquake damage. Many claimants, believing the company cannot sustain the position, have sued it. Was undoubtedly able to pay all claims in full. Fifty per cen». seems to have been offered very much more frequently than 75 per cent. We have a record of one settlement at 50 per cent. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 37 (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) "NYE DANSKE," COPENHAGEN: Loss understood to have been incurred entirely through reinsurance No details obtainable as to its extent or the company's settlements. ORIENT, HARTFORD. CONN.: Most claims apparently settled at 5 per cent, dis- count Is owned by the London & Lancashire and was undoubtedly able to pay in full, but set- tled on the same basis as the Lo.ndon & LancaBhire witli discounts ranging up to 10 per cent. Methods sharply criticised OSAGE. SAN FRANCISCO: This IS not an incorporated company, but simply an aggregation of individuals who insured each other A loss of $15,000 is reported, but no details of the settlement could be obtained. OZARK, FORT SMITH. ARK.: Loss small; not known to iiave settled on any basis. Out of business PACIFIC COAST FIRE, VANCOUVER, B. C: Nominal loss; no report as to settlement. PACIFIC FIRE. NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settlements reported range from 70 per cent, of amount due upward Higliest settlements reported to us, 90 per cent Complaints regarding adjusters' methods, wiiich caused severe criticism of the com- pany Figures furnished by company show very low average of settlements PACIFIC UNDERWRITERS, SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.: Policies were guaranteed two-thirds by the Fire- man's Fund and one-third by the Home Fire & Marine. Settled same basis as Fireman's Fund, which see. PALATINE, LONDON, ENG.: This company is owned by the Commercial Union of London. At first denied any liability under strong eartliquakc clause; later offered 50 per cent, and 75 per cent., according to the loca- tion of tlie property with relation to the earth- quake damage. Was able to pay in full. "PATERNELLE," PARIS: Settled promptly and in full without discount. 38 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) PELICAN ASSURANCE, NEW YORK: Owned by the Phoenix of London and settled generally on the same basis as that company, viz., in full less 2 per cent, for cash. PENNSYLVANIA FIRE, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Paid usually in full at the end of sixty days, or immediately less 2 per cent, to 5 per cent, cash discount. Some settlements reported at lower fig- ures. No complaints filed with us regarding its treatment of claimants. PETER COOPER, NEW YORK: Offered generally 75 per cent., a small loss re- ported settled at a higher figure. Methods sharply criticised. Loss comparatively small. Able to pay in full. PHENIX, BROOKLYN, N. Y.: Offered 75 per cent, in some instances, but paid numerous claims in full at expiration of time limit, or less I per cent, to 5 per cent, cash discount. Many other claims reported to us settled at 90 per cent, and various m'termediate figures, and some at as low as 85 per cent. Practice seems to have been to secure largest discount obtainable; com- plaint^ regarding treatment of claimants numer- ous. Its loss was very heavy, but its sworn state- ments as published by the New York Insurance Department show that it could have paid in full. PHILADELPHIA FIRE, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: This company failed in 1904, but was mentioned in a proof of loss as involved for $500. PHILADELPHIA UNDERWRITERS, PHILA- DELPHIA, PA.; These policies are jointly guaranteed by the Fire Association of Philadelphia and the Insurance Company of North America. It is stated, upon good authority, that the adjustments were handled by the Fire Association under an old agreement existing between the two companies Most of the claims seem to have been settled at 90 per cent, to 95 per cent., though we have many reports of set- tlements in full or less 2 per cent cash discount. See comments on settlements of Fire Association. The Insurance Company of North America settled its own losses at a higher average than the Fire Association. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 39 {See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) PHOENIX ASSURANCE, LONDON, ENG.: Nearly all claims paid in full less i per cent, or '2 per cent, for cash. Several settlements at 5 per cent, discount reported. Treatment courteous. PHOENIX, HARTFORD, CONN.: Paid in full less 2 per cent, for cash in practi- cally all cases. A few isolated settlements at 5 per cent, discount or more reported, where earthqual^ damage alleged. General record good; no com- plaints filed. Figures show high average of set- tlements. "POLAR," BILBAO, SPAIN: Loss small; settled promptly and in full without discount. PROTECTOR UNDERWRITERS. SAN FRAN- CISCO, CAL.: Policies guaranteed by Phoenix of Hartford; same settlements. PROVIDENCE - WASHINGTON. P R O V I- DENCE, R. I. Settled generally at discount of 2 per cent, to 5 per cent, and a few se'ttlements in full reported. In other cases reported to have settled at dis- counts ranging up to 15 per cent, or more, where earthquake damage claimed. General average shown by company's figures furnished to us only fair. Loss heavy, but could have paid in full. PRUSSIAN NATIONAL, STETTIN, GERMANY: As a rule offered 75 per cent., though we have 3 record of one very strong concern which forced a settlement in full. In several cases it settled at better than 75 per cent. Considerable criticism of its methods. Able to pay in full if losses cor- rectly reported. QUEEN CITY, SIOUX FALLS, S. D.: A small company with a large loss, but able to pay all claims in full. Settlements reported range from 75 per cent upward; the majority appear to be at about 90 per cent. Some claims were paid in full on the basis of one-third down, one-third in three months and one-third in six months. QUEEN INSURANCE CO. OF AMERICA. NEW YORK: Paid all claims in full, immediately on adjust- ment, without discount. Record of the best. Only 40 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) four other companies (other than those whose loss was nominal) settled as liberally. Treatment of claimants courteous and entirely satisfactory REPUBLIC MUTUAL, JOHNSTOWN, PA.: This was a "wild-cat" mutual concern, reported to have lost $10,000; not known to have made any settlements; placed in the hands of a receiver in January, 1907. RHINE & MOSELLE, STRASBOURG, GER- MANY: Withdrew from the State. Offered to settle claims of $500 or less at 50 per cent, refusing to pay anything on larger claims. Record very bad. A committee representing claimants went to Ger- many to endeavor to effect a settlement, but evi- dently failed to accomplish anything tangible. ROCHESTER GERMAN, ROCHESTER, N. Y.: Settlements reported range from 85 per cent up- ward, the majority being at 90 per cent, or 95 per cent. Some claims were settled in full less 2 per cent, for cash. Loss was very heavy in proportion to the company's resources. 'ROSSIA," ST. PETERSBURG: Reinsurance only. ROYAL EXCHANGE ASSURANCE, LONDON, ENG.: A wide variety of settlements reported, the ma- jority being at 90 per cent, to 95 per cent., though a great many claims were settled at 98 per cent. Company was unquestionably able to pay in full. Methods of its adjusters caused complaint in some cases. ROYAL INSURANCE COMPANY. LIVERPOOL, ENG.: Paid all claims in full immediately upon adjust- ment without even cash discount. Treatment of claimants courteous and entirely satisfactory. Only four other companies settled on this basis, except a few whose loss was nominal. RUSSIAN TRANSPORT, ST. PETERSBURG: One settlement reported at 80 per cent. Figures furnished by company indicate that it settled at Jbetween 85 per cent, and 90 per cent, of the amount due. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 41 (See pages 48 to 6j for details of loss.) ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE, ST. PAUL, MINN.: Many claims settled in full or less 2 per cent.; a number of settlements at 95 per cent, reported Treatment of claimants satisfactory SALAMANDRA, ST. PETERSBURG: Reinsurance only. "SALAMANDRE," HAVRE, FRANCE: Loss small. No details of settlements. Figures submitted by company indicate that it paid about 80 per cent, of the amount due. SCOTCH UNDERWRITERS, SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.: These policies were guaranteed by the Cale- donian of Edinburgh, which see; settlements on same basis, and subject to same criticism. SCOTTISH UNION AND NATIONAL. EDIN- BURGH, SCOTLAND: Nearly all claims paid in full when adjusted or less I per cent, or 2 per cent, cash discount. In some cases paid in full at the end of sixty days; in others discounts ranging as high as 10 per cent, are reported. Treatment of claimants courteous. General average of payments high. SEATTLE F. & M., SEATTLE, WASH.: Settled promptly and in full. SECOND RUSSIAN, ST. PETERSBURG: One settlement reported at 80 per cent. Figures furnished by company indicate that it paid from 85 per cent, to 90 per cent, of the amount due Small loss; able to pay in full. SECURITY FIRE, BALTIMORE, MD.: Denied liability because of earthquake clause and made no attempts to settle its losses. Record bad. Outstanding business was reinsured in the New Jersey Fire Insurance Company which is now being operated by the general agency firm which for- merly operated the Security Fire. A receiver was appointed June 20, 1906, for the latter. No pay- ments have been made to date as far as known and no definite statement has been made by the receiver regarding the ccHidition of the estate or the probable amount and time of payment of divi- 42 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.} dends to creditors. He has, however, been ener- getic in having all claims properly filed and ex- amined. SECURITY FIRE, CINCINNATI, OHIO: Reinsurance only. (See Eureka.) SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY, NEW HAVEN, CONN.: Settled most of its claims at about 5 per cent, discount; in some cases only i per cent, or 2 per cent discount was taken. In other cases discounts of 10 per cent or more are reported. Some com- plaints from claimants. SHAWNEE FIRE, TOPEKA, KAN.: One loss through reinsurance; paid as per proofs on receipt o.f same. SKANDIA, STOCKHOLM. SWEDEN: Reinsurance only. "SOLEIL," PARIS: Small loss; paid promptly and in full without discount. SOUTHERN, NEW ORLEANS, LA.: Small loss. No report as to settlement; figures furnished by company indicate that it paid 90 per cent. SPRINGFIELD FIRE & MARINE, SPRING- FIELD, MASS.: Settled practically all claims in full or less i per cent, or 2 per cent, for cash. In rare instances 5 per cent, cash discounts reported. Treatment of claimants uniformly excellent. Its average of pay- ments was very high. SPRING GARDEN, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Paid generally 70 per cent, or 75 per cent.; but in some cases it is reported to have paid 90 per cent, or more. To secure settlements at 70 per cent, its representatives are reported to have al- leged that it was unable to pay more. Its present statement shows that this was not true, assuming its statement of the amount of its loss to be accu- rate. There appears to have been no uniformity in the treatment of claimants, the company asking large discounts, and paying as high as 95 per cent, if unable to settle at less. Most of the settlements, BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 43 (See pages 48 to 63 for detcils of loss.) however, were around 70 per cent. Repeated re- quests for a statement in detail of its losses have been ignored. Methods were sharply criticised. STANDARD, AMSTERDAM: Small loss; paid promptly and in full without discount STATE, DES MOINES, IOWA: No information obtainable from the company as to the extent of its loss, and no reports filed with us regarding its settlements. STATE, OMAHA, NEB.: Small loss; paid in full. STATE FIRE, LIVERPOOL, ENG.: Reports indicate that settlements were about 95 per cent, on the average, though some claims are reported paid in full. STUYVESANT, NEW YORK, N. Y.: Settlements reported range from 70 per cent, to 90 per cent. Numerous complaints from policy- holders. Its sworn statements show that it was able to pay in full; apparently no valid reason for arbitrary discounts demanded. SUN INSURANCE OFFICE, LONDON, ENG.: Paid nearly all claims at 2 per cent, cash dis- count or in full at end of sixty days. In a few in- stances discounts of 5 per cent, or 7 per cent, are reported. Treatment of claimants was courteous and no complaints have been recorded with us regarding this company. SVEA FIRE & LIFE, GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN: Endeavored to secure large discounts and settled many claims at 75 per cent, to 85 per cent. Other settlements range all the way up to 98 per cent, and an occasional settlement in full is reported. No uniformity in the settlements made; practice was evidently to exact largest discount obtainable. Able to pay in full, although its loss was heavy. TANNERS' MUTUAL, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: Paid its single loss in full. TEUTONIA, NEW ORLEANS, LA.: Settled most claims in full or less 2 per cent, to 5 per cent, discount. A fev/ less favorable settU- ments reported. No complaints regarding it re- corded with us. General average good. 44 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 6s for details of loss.) THURINGIA, ERFURT, GERMANY: This company's business was reinsured some years ago in the Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., of Sin Francisco, which company is ultimately liable for losses under Thuringia policies; but the Thur- ingia is responsible to the insured. It docs not appear to have made any general offer to pay losses under its policies, endeavoring to induce claimants to deal with the Fireman's Fund, which could not pay in full. Claimants have consequently suffered great inconvenience. Sohie settlements by the Fireman's Fund are reported cli the same basis as the settlements of the latter; that is, 50 per cent, in cAsh, payable in installments, and 50 per cent, in stock of the Fireman's Fund at a valuation of 500 per cent. We know of some claims settled practically in full by this company upon the refusal of the policyholders to deal with the Fireman's Fund. TIDE WATER, CAMBRIDGE, MD.: Small loss. Not known to have made any settle- ments. Company practically out of business. TRADERS, CHICAGO, ILL.: Went into hands of a receiver soon after the fire. No settlements made. Receiver estimates that company will pay about 70 per cent, in liqui- dation. The receiver denied liability on all the claims on every technicality possible under the policy, making, it necessary for the insiired to prove every claim. TRADERS' FIRE. TORONTO, CANADA: Loss small; reported settled at 75 per cent TRANSATLANTIC, HAMBURG, GERMANY: Denied liability, though its policies did not con- tain an earthquake clause. Withdrew from the State and made no effort to meet its obligations. Has been sued both in the United States and in Germany. Its losses were very heavy. On Jan. 16, 1907, art offer of compromise settlement was made, providing for the payment of 20 per cent. of the adjusted claihis, liquidation by the company, and thereupon a distribution to cLiiitiants of 75 per cent, of the net assets, after certain reserves have BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 45 {See pages 48 to 63 for details of loss.) been made and the pension fund for employees of the company deducted. The agreement becomes binding only if 90 per cent, of all claimants sign it prior to April 22nd, 1907. , TRAVELERS' FIRE, PINE BLUFF, ARK.: Only four losses; two paid in full, and two less 10%, after considerable delay. UNION ASSURANCE SOCIETY, LONDON, ENG.: Paid majority of its losses less 2 per cent, for cash; many in full, "and others less 1 per cent. Other settlements are reported at 5 per cent, and some at greater discount. Treatment satisfactory. UNION FIRE, PARIS, FRANCE: Small loss; settled promptly and in full without discount. UNION, PHILADELPHIA, PA.: No direct losses. Entire liability through rein- surance of Pennsylvania Fire Insurance Company, which released this company upon receiving a guarantee of payment from a syndicate of stock- holders of the Union. UNITED FIREMENS, PHILADELPHIA, PA. Paid most of its losses at 90 per cent, or 95 per cent., but some settlements reported at less than 90 per cent. Its statements show that it was able to pay in full. UNITED STATES FIRE, NEW YORK. Losses mainly reinsurance. Company states that its few direct losses 'vcre paid in full. "URBAINE," PARIS, FRANCE: Small loss; settled promptly and in full without discount. VERMONT MUTUAL, MONTPELIER, VT.: Small loss; settled in full. VICTORIA FIRE, NEW YORK, N. Y. This company is owned by the Union Assurance Society of London and settled on same basis. Is now out of business. VIRGINIA STATE, RICHMOND, VA.: Small loss; no reports of settlement. , 46 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. (See pages 48 to 63 far details of los?.) WABASH. HAMMOND, IND.: ' Very small loss. Company in liquidation; not known to have made any settlements. WASHINGTON FIRE, SEATTLE, WASH.: Very heavily involved for a company of its size, partly through direct and partly through reinsur- ance business. Settled promptly and in full; rec- ord excellent. WELLINGTON MUTUAL, GUELPH, ON- TARIO: Paid at from 85 per cent, to' 95 per cent. Losses small; the company having written only surplus lines in San Francisco. No apparent reason why it should not have paid in full. WESTCHESTER, NEW YORK, N. Y.: MpiSt of the claims appear to have been paid in full or less i per cent., 2 per cent, or 5 per cent, discount. Other settlements at discounts up to 10 per cent, reported. Average high. WESTERN ASSURANCE, TORONTO, ONT.: In the great majority of cases claims were paid at 100 per cent., though some settlements are re- ported at discounts of 10 per cent, or 15 per cent. In many instances payment of part of the loss was deferred and term drafts issued. Practically all of these term drafts have matured and been paid. No complaints reported to us, the settle- ments having given general satisfaction. Figures filed by the company show high average of settle- ments. Loss severe. WILLIAMSBURG CITY, BP.OOKLYN, N. Y.: Most of this company's losses were settled at SO per cent, or 75 per cent., because of an earth- quake clause in its policy. It claims to have paid liberally under the policies which did not contain the earthquake clause; reports indicate that as a rule it paid about 95 per cent, in such cases. The earthquake clause used by this company was very strict in its terms. WILMINGTON FIRE, WILMINGTON, DEL.: Losses small; one settlement reported at 70 per cent. Figures furnished by company indicate that it paid from 75 per cent, to 80 per cent, on the average. YORK MUTUAL FIRE, TORONTO, ONT.: Small loss; no claim yet made; states will settle in full. BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 47 EXPLANATION OF RATIO USED IN SAN FRANCISCO LOSS TABLE After careful thought, we concluded that the only fair basis of comparison between con-ipanies was the ratio of the net loss incurred tq the net amount involved. By this we mean the actual net amount paid out by each company, or remaining unpaid but acknowledged as a liability; and the face of the poli- cies under which claims were filed, less the face of the reinsurance thereon. Different companies kept their records in different ways. For instance, one company would enter in the reinsurance column the amount due from the reinsuring companies, on the basis of the claims filed against the original com- pany; and would then deduct in the salvage column only the salvages, etc., on the net amount of its loss. Other companies, on the contrary, would include in the reinsurance column the amount actually recov- ered or to be recovered frojn the reinsuring com- panies; and would then enter in the salvage column the salvage on the entire loss, including the share of the reinsurers. Whatever the method, however, all the companies finally arrived at a correct state- ment of the net loss incurred. Practically all the claims were paid when the figures reported to us were made up, and the amount actually disbursed necessarily could no.t vary however the accounts were kept. The amount of the comparatively few claims remaining unpaid could be closely estimated, and consequently it is fair to assume that the state- ment of the net loss as reported to us is approxi- mately correct in every case. This latter item we compare with the net amount of the policies under which clamis were filed, the aggregate of those claims appearing in the item of "net loss." A moment's consideration will show that this must be a fair basis of comparison for all com- panies which sustained a sufficient number of losses to insure an average experience in adjusting. This ratio is absolutely reliable, except in the rare cases where the figures evidently have been incorrectly reported to us, and we have made every effort in such cases to secure the correct figures. If the ratio is lower than one might expect, there is some good reason for it. A company showing a low ratio on a large number of adjustments simply settled in that way. Its own figures show conclusively and beyond any possibility of controversy that it did not settle as liberally as some other companies showing a higher ratio. We desire to emphasize as strongly as possible that this ratio does NOT indicate the percentage of the claims against them paid by each company. That percentage is shown in our comments on the individual companies making up the body of our report. 18 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. j o U) o . +-» rt o o CM r^ vO COO »oo Cr-- - o « o f o o CM •* o oo ^^ Ov-' r; O. c/: ,^"f^ o OO** 00 fOO '^j^^* O eu o ^-a 60 ^^o oo 00 CO 00 «-» cOr^ 1 o o 3i2 rt u-> O O- O >0 '-' ■'^ oo vO'- U5 o o o o — o 1-. "f C) ^ o •.- o O c8 c a 1^ O •*_""; c-'i o oT tm in 0_ <>_ r^j O vo oo_ 05 3 3 "2 GO o o ^~- OO^^O O ^^r^ r^ o iS w OC rO O O CN o o on LO o O CM C ^^ O-*^ a> ^- fv^ *— 1 •—«*-< .-H "^ (l> S 0)0*-. ^— ^ ^^ ti t-,-2 »- o o vO -> O r>. <)0 \0 ^ »/-, Tf ^ 6^ s "+ :yD c>0 O "-> r- O ^ Oi^ (3 M ro C^ t^ l>^ ■* m CO o o o CM j^ T in ro 9 o 1^ CO "^ -- '-> ro O" CJ o" r- inO ^'oci Iq J \/-, .-• I^ "-' vO ^ -O O CM O «^XN O o o\ CO c> O vO t- O -^ ■^ y5 r~ ^ U *-> T-1 CN ♦-' '^"'^"x;^'^" g^" ts z S§! r» •-) 6 O CMOO O O CM OOO •V4 c 2 •5 ^ IT) tn o .-a- T)< o "1 y-; C> \0 ,— •* ""- O O t^ CM ir. O O J3 (N CM (N ^ «^ CM CN ^ '^ CO -~ o omo & 'i" O — ' ro '0*0 ^o" csj" rC >— vO in rr r^ CO 0~ "-I CM t^ ■* ..^co CM t-~ CO d 3 " O ro S C^ -^ O"^ C '^ ^so_ .9 CM '^ «- "^ gci J P^ '3. iS o ^ O O t~~ O CM Ov O O K-, O- O —' »*> «? O ^ W O •:}< O -S" CO o o O in r^ Cv 00 O CM r^ vn CM O t^ O O "^ O CO O in O ^ o O O t~ '-I C?v o"x^ oo'o'o" O CM O O O vO ro O Qn ro r^ Q O vo O v~. >c) t^ Oi^ <*) ^ lO 00 O rO t/1 23 •^ -a* »-< CO ^'cMci"'^*^" .«>■* rs O /— N Tt* u w «) J>0 Oh 1 !2 O oO >rt to rO CM ^ -^ >*in CN CM o OvX^ ,rO O 901^ ;.— t: O r^ vO lO CM ^_^^^0 CM O CM ^ ^ ,-. g '^SS "o^ rX to 2 w ^. '■■£ i" ^"=^ W i; C in VS c^ d ai ci Co o o o o o c c C '-u 'C rt o 0) «> "o 1 a) 0) tkfi^: ~ s e E € H I <<<<< <<<<:<: BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 40 o o <^o VO »o O Ov -H VO o v^O c<« \n •^ O lO O I^ \y-> --H o fN OOO r» 00 O fN t^ Tf o /-v»-< Vj ^4 «-4 rn 00 CO Tf ^^ <3 tN-^ C 10 o O O O "^ "^ .^ f-^\r, \ri \o 00 ■^ •^ OO o in O i-^' <^i O vO T)* . "-> (N <^ r^ .^ XT) VO o ~ r^ VO ro ro vr> rvi M Ov r^ W-) t^ O o 2-3 " oo t^ CO >-< rv) ^3 -H cv* 00 VO Ov 1^ vO VO t^ VO ■<* VO vO VO t^ •« O OOO VO fO VO O O fS -rj< r^ O O t^ oO 00 O ro O 00 t^ O VO O -t VO O »^ O * •-< fO to O ■rt -r^ VO '5' ■* Ov "* VO 00 to ^ 3 S 'S ^ § ^" ^ •-■ ra ^ '^ tn en -£ J^ -»^ 3 3rt d'c Hill "-n -^ tc if ^ aapqcscQu ^ o — : bo J t ^-^W o^ b/:;^ ■£ S c ra"^ o CO re.i; aj-g -^'f^-i: c 'H '5 tf c „- o - p «:i re nS re rt rt o UUUUO ■2 ^o t:^)'^ ■9 rt ^ t'^!:; rt C >v aw ^ act c - m >> S o a>i lyi c C n H 03 w c5 3X) a o ^ o cro o O 0) c (J •u ,r^ 1" r) 3 -i-J ^ W. 0) -d m 'ri re o -d re o a 2i 'c1 +j ^ s c '/I 0) Q 05 d 4-> o c cS o VJ o O o p r" S 2 w- -t^ t^ M S)00 3"> % ir U VO v5 4)^ ^0 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 1 <^ ,n <^ • ■^ « il -^ -o O •^' • i-J r^ 00 ■0 OfM £^'5o'^ O i> • r^j '^ O^ o o •-'.!:• CD 0\ • OC ^■^ "^ Sn ° 2"^ O O -00 00 vO«-. •I/-. COO . "C « O ^ ; of poli- (less face insurance on) under h claims e made. o -^ o rj -t 00 -r ■^ "■ ""'. '^. -: ' ^ r-i CM n 00 C4 <^ o — o O O cc o W-. CO 00" 1-' rj 13 ^^ 'o CM '0 A3 > feo'^-5 ^ " C r^i <^i ^"H ro CO 'n (^ r- 00 t^ -t ^.0 t- -f sO '■''; 1^ t/i u-, --i f^ 1^ CM t^ CO ^ rt o (N O^ 00 u t^ c^i 0" •-" r'; c^l \r, 00 -) T— < \r, ,— ( '^ ri CM rO ^ ^ rj 00 ;^E <> «-H v.^ ■(-> ^ ^H ■.^ QJ ^ "0 ■^ , -CI i -lO C fo -0 .- w C Tj ,A >o ^;i fO ^-B'^ua CN fO <> ^. rt - O O .'^■^ . <^z . 10 . . . . »o" . Salv; cash ounts lloth ducti r;jcoto~ CN*^ ■s ^' ^^^'^^ K-""^ K So S R R R R R O rt 2i r-i 00 3 vr> CM 0) ro V'l «C 00 r*« l>. CM y rf-^ o_cc fO <» fO »0 rt m c •* Tj"" \r> ■^ J- rO vO 3 . CM ."^ w ^- (U .s ■r* ■«• *_3 R R R R R R c »— < LO o t^ w-> »-l 00 oc w vO ▼-4 vo 00 10 vO vO r^ VI O 10 00 ■^ ro ^0_ 0_ 00 CM_ — _ 0_ '^ 0_ c~^J 0' r^ 0" t^ 0' ^"oo"o r^ rO CM CO 00" CO ■^ CM •>r ^ (M ■* ■^■^ o> _ (M r-> »-t CK "> »o t/7 2 o — T^' ^ cm" 5' S-.' ^ i-i CM >/-> rO Tj< \r) rr. •«*• — 00 r^ — t^ ■^ rO ■<1' "^ 3 " ri i2 w w w G • • *-> • 'rt'cl '5'S ■2 Mil S B 5.0 w P* to f u qq U <5 C3 CO C) ■g.S 00 ^ss - 65323 Q 00 000 aaeaa BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. Si 100.00 89.10 96.19 97.23 74.46 80.50 (7) 57.65 8 47 75.00 ta obtainable, the company nee Providence- Washington, inly reinsurance German of All reinsurance of Fireman's comments oa another page. 2ading; looses not paid. 2.000 2.751,984 1,819,238 17.250 852,561 «N c^i tN vn 120,500 80,866 353.000 "vj" 2,000 2,452,111 1,749,872 16,773 634,822 1.829 13,987 954,719 29,875 537,341 ■0 - vn ^000 c a o_ response to repeated requests. (6) Estimated from best da tion. (c) Details unobtainable. (,d) Entire loss reinsura over-insurance; all claims paid in full as per proofs. (/) Ma and manner as German. Details of loss not furnished. {g) d in bulk. {h) Denies liability under earthquake clause; see ; settled as per proofs. (;) Percentage omitted because misl ntl. nil. 95,201 477 288,317 443 1,013 46,320 {a) 315,368 sOt:}in 0^ 00" (^^ hJ CO ""^ «^ to tn u nil. 908.040 690,309 nil. nil. nil. 149,255 (a) 132,320 18,000 Included in figu nil u 2,000 3,360,152 2,535,472 17,250 999,716 2,272 15,000 1,150,295 29.875 935,030 69,467 104,866 (g) 3 5 3, 000 ■o — ^ ^ '- r- •* vO — vO vn r* vn rn vn t^ 3 3 CO Tf 'J' CN (a) Information not furnished in ignoring requests for informa {e) Laige deductions due to Freeport; will pay same time Fund ; compromised and pai (j) Reinsurance of Austin fire 0 »^ r^ O ^ Tf to O 0\ «~» •OOt^ ■ o o >o ■r^ O ■^ 00 0> O^ 0^ O 3 rj O vo "»!• o On 00 00 00 t^ s 3 •00 00 00 O fO o o O 00 o o >o r» O to r^ ■^ fO po O O O ■* O O O O O tN O O W1 >o O 00 to O o o -^ t^ o »o 0» to rf ti-) po ^ O O t^ to to in O CO fn r^ CN O CO O to o o ^ _ ' 4) 4> O O C TJ T3 «i C3 C4 0) V Cih £i. Cx. Cb Hi* I-. w ;3 ;s _o - in .— en 05 - 3 u ^ OQ c . c ca -^ J3 , < 4) 13 c S 3 rt c« Xi C § o SB *t o> ^ (N ■* CM • to _. (^1 00 00 00 00 00 0> • r^ 5"°° r^O O fO O NO CO O "-. Tt CO 00 ■<}< O to o oo O0_<* ro •o__q.r-._ 0_0_io O^ t^ O^ no" th" ^" NO to"—" O IT) o 00 CO 00 On ct fS lO W-) CO o O NO /•^^-v O CNj t~» 'i' 00 O CO ^ O 0^ rji vo NO •rt •t-H too t~-^o_ »5 to_^ 00_ o_ . . ^ NO ■«4< fO O to «-! to ro" -h' o oT ro" oo" to" ';^Tt< t--. •. C NO vo to CV| On O . 1 to . CN fO fO _4? CN . ■* w ■1 t^ . •— 13 ~* -^ •»* «»-<•»» «: .5 « w R cni r^ r^ O t>. ^ t1< CO O to to 00 Tj< O "-I co"on"-h O o" CN On to O CO — CM O On 00 CNJ h3 • >^. : ■"^ -'C . o oo, . ;S G c c S M CtJ rt CTj c3 csssa Crt (h Ui li li iX 1-1 c dj . 0) • TJ C C C3 ri rt rt see li Vh t-< . t/) c 0)30.5 o C ^^ Oh (/5 c.S ™ (/5 '^ CD (0 Q,+j OO ^is O c c *-> ^ o c ^ 6 c ^ g«2 o oJ PL, Q c^- 04 4J 3 I-, 3 _ o ^ U5 O Q 0) 05 - rt MO — •^ C rt 00 r^ 13 O rt . -CM On - o _ "Tn oj 7^ 03 C >N-S .2 M^ 3 2 rt -h ti o- V. ^ r3 c 3 tr S3 a.-;;) 0. S.^ 'S 0) cj »- 1..; yj Wh I- rt W' O O • »6 to ■ O 0 r^ O «^ O CO CT> O «^ O a o f>- o 00 O O O- O «^ 00 o ■* •^ O r^ CN o 0 O fN 00 Oi^OO"-" CMoOOcOO ^000 Of'jOOOto «-imO>oio ^""vO §1 o o vo O —• \0 t^ >0 •'^ -O fO ^— .rt< (^ (N -O T-i V 1-3 ^^ 4) O •5 -a -g "vj o ™ <5 S O 3 ^2§:3'0 O C>4 <0 CO O 0 U-) lo 00 fM O . >0 . to Tf O >0 ro <-i lO t^ CO 00 .8 wt ^ ^ ^ ^" C C S C o •^ o to •* O 8CC O CN O "-,0 00 C <3 to CM to fo NO O to O -< — O f^ p O_oo o_>o o •-1 r^ to%f O* O (N »" u^ E ° S 3 ^ O •t to to >0 O rO<*5rOa^'-« c<^ioC<»- < Ml O -. in 3 (0 261,577 229.190 (c) 575,157 489,466 1,882 («) 7,000 800 34,864 nil. Included in nil. C T3 326,326 519,338 (0 3.583,326 3.126,515 9,552 nil. nil. 72,870 ished in response to repeated requests, or information. (c) Details unobtainab ited States, under which loss was $13.50. of Traders of Chicago. Liability estimate e herein. (i) All reinsurance of Austin f 3 [^ 2,295,315 4,752,094 7,789,088 8,291,390 24,750 (g) 14, 186 5,000 350,611 J O^ O CN >o « '-I tn OO <*> VO o ^ (> r-. >0 r* - c 4-4 .—4 o> t^ O fO •* O . ooo r^'OO'"* • o cd C^ 00 o o» OOO 50 u^OOO 1 I u • O Ooo -< 00 o rt 00_O_O «~~_ O O-H O^O'T--^ 2 3^ rt toto^'f-." y u) K Cs o_oo o^_ 00 »^ ••-1 O o 00 10 vO^ c> c« (0 o rC Tj<" ut" lO t^ O "-i 00 iX" T-T 10 o>" ;5 ►3 00 00 j^ 00 1^-* ■* «o ^PO fS v4 ^ Ov ro CN vO >0 r^ w) i/^ »o » "2 S'O - fl> • O ^ 00 lO cs ■<* o t^ rt >* 00 1^ 4) c o •^00 -1 -H ■* 0_ -H_ •-^ 00 r. . <4 C/3 O OS ■2 o 3 ♦^ s nj o" «o" a t-« ro o ^o 3 "^ . . vo . . ~J ~; -^ —• .-i ■^ '^ •«« '^ft '^ ^^ •*• •<* •^ -T* •^•^ «t G S R s ;: s ;: ;: c s c c J Pi Tt O O "^ O "^ O O 00 f^ t-- 00 • 00 O lO CN O fD 00 O 00 ro ro 10 •-< w r»^ 0_ 00 i-» 0_'-<^t-_0_»H 0_>J-> 0_C> CN •4 O ^ 00* lO c< «o «<^ t^ »-< o t— — 1 r- r>. ^H VD Ofo •-• 00 -^ ^♦4 •^- v '•"G^ 00 CM cs ^ 3 ^ '^ z " . CIS 4J o-a SS: SS jiiisss 2SSSS BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 5 7 *• to 00 O OO Or- O t- O •O »^ r* vrj O oo O 1" CM t^ 00 CO lO ro ^o o 2 O 'J^ -< t- -O • ■* 00 OO t^ O O » r- 00 a- ■ O ^ ;2^ O fo O O oo O O to i-O O O O <*5 lO o o o O-o CN O O O lO to lO in r— 00 t- o O ro -^ 00 «o 4 O (M to to O I'i'o"^ f^ tS ^ o O c-i r>4 -O •^ •* CM 00 -H <# CO ri> T^ O CM O to OC — a< o vo 00 t>. t-. to O PO t^ CM o ~ o in •-! 00 O t^ fO vo \0 O tM C^ to O^ to t O t^ «-< o o p* r*. p« O §000-1 O O O •t 10 in 00 10 vo ^" CM o" CM 00 10 vO t O •-^ in rn t— C^ — fO O <~0 rO CO '+ — O CM t>- r^ t^ — ' 00 ■<* O Ok w% r^ rv« «M Ot v« CO -< — ■*-<-< S 3 2 5 S •j^ 2 c c o I S3 .2.9'^ rt CTJ nj nj'T' C^ 5 C C "5 C C O O. .— ■♦-' .^ .— ^ CTJ 3 c3 nJ^ CS C C J2 .9 °.9 2 '^ *j Sj 'H Xi cd o3 ctJ cd Q^ 2222:2 : : : > >-. . >^>H r ^" £J « „>-•< «:5 o h <^ E5 ^ *-■ 22222 wow-- M O _. Ic — o — O 3 0) c £ .rt o~ 3'0 rt ?^ P « m 3 (0*^ — ' JS " o tn - w 3§? ox* 0) T3 o 3 2 o-"S h 0-3 y-.— g 0) l-i CO 6S §=u^.S ■•-> > -^ a 4> C/> OJ y O 60^ v„ ^ W (/5 (/) O vd .. I-I _^ C .3 0 • • . a L4-t "— f &. t^ t-- -^00 t^NO ^ 0000 00 OvO> 00 t^ 00 t-. eg — ' -i '^ CM CM \o "-> i>^ no' ro" fO no' CM ^' 00_^ 00 v« S8 3 2-5 e \0 r^ 10 --< CO "^O «-4 ^m^ !/) 10 •># 10 ly^ 10 CM -H _c It •^"cm'co" *^" 3,3, 'qCm'^^'o" 4J i> .^ fa -3 "o -^ 6 •^ o\ 00 00 to 00 rf C _ rOO On NO OCM -1 to 00 9 CA r^ to »-i u-> CMTj-OO -» On__0_<0_0_0>__ 91 !o aJ r^ ■•-« 00 VO* cm" 0." ^' fNj* 1_ NO ro »-' «-« u-> CnJ NO 00 •" «^ On {J £ '^.fH to 10 •^ •-1 10 to t>. -t-» "^(SfO cm" *»i^ ^^ ** •d M z ii s <« l-l c e9 T) i ►^ t^ CO o» <0 CM NO to Tf NO k f c-o ui G CO to NO C^l ^0 ^ Si, U3 rt *»-l C^_ Tf ^ o\_ CM tO_ .-1 On_ bo ^ -5 °00"pO/~--" ^>o^« ** y nj t^ «r> •<1< 0000 to CM to to MH a> 10 NO CM ^ tn O t~> o_o_>o NO to •* NO CN <0 o 3 "O . «-i <4 HH S s J3 "a — H vo 0> •"i'O to fO — 00 _J w Q»0 Tf fS CS 10 to On O'-CM g On to l~-_ 00Of»_ CM J 10 f<1 to »o"cm"o*«m «^' •«*•" On" ^"■ vOO00-< 00 t-O ■r- NO fO ^ V*H "i o_>o_o>^ ^ ■-H 00 to CMi-ir>._ ^ »^ oT «N«o ^" ■^" CM* 2^^* ^ «> cB s (14 - ^ 03 vO tn CN On M : i: : ; w -o • • r; r; 0) "= !;; c t-'tO t. V- Ii . rtCQDQ . (U.2 ^ fS .5:i Q -«• +J ^J *J <-) -u W< 1- i-> w. k-i 00000 21^^22 2:2:2:22: 222; BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 59 ■*fO .UT«f>0 VO CO r» 00 »H • to I • in OO O^ -^ CM o^-o • Ov 00 Ov t^ OvOv 0-* O fO 0\ ro •^oT r^ rf PO 'O to Ov CO (N ■O -H \r> CO r^ ra t-» o> SS ^ O f^" C3 »*5 ^-N 'J - - v^ ^ ^i •a c £ rt < ooocofe OOO-iTOO CNOSOOO OOOr^ a- O^O— _Oio — VO J^^ ro — r^O OO CC r^ 00 ^^-- C> ^0 0» wo 0> si> t^t- ge E >0_ Tj* OV Ov_ W-^.'-. •-«" CS "^i^ Oci^ "^ tj O T? 1— 1 C 3 -^ -< rj- (N O "d o rq (^ ^ LO O vC ) oo C Ov CM fO «> "^.O o^ rt CJ CM ,.-^.— ~J-J w •»!< LO O 00* • cm"oo" r2 Tf O -H •* O o ^.^. t^ ■"-! r^ \0 r^ (« r^ fO ^ « t> -^ fO CJ ro 00 00 . -^ VO W VO 'ij' SSI a ^-» 3 - S c C *"^ O O 00 Tf o -- O >0 ro O OoT!oOt}« I O OO -"-O 00 O O fo C CM O nH O »0 O lO 0^ * VO '^ CM ^o Tj< CM r^ O^ O — o «o VO 00 LO \0 ro t^ rr >o .-4 00 O ^-»'~» /— N '^ CM /— s *"" "^ wnS 3 vo Cal . . . Ark... couver. ers ... . • d ladel'a. Y , N. Y. .Pa... rs ondon . . Conn . Fran., mith, t, Van N. Y. erwrit °1 a. Phi r, N. oklyn Phila. rwrite iur,, L rtford C/J M -•« ne, Lo rnelle, ylvani Coope X. Bro ^'^ in ^ age, San ark. Ft. cific Coa cific Fire cific Uni .^'S< X lati ate lica nns ter eni ila. ila. oen oen w N nj nj rt acn ii V V j:.cxj2ar c >0&,A,^ ^: A ^p. (ii^(i,a.a. ' 9|^ ^ u< 1=3 b •S^- o .1-1 «> «.> "O-O V n c ^p: *> o U3 n 3«2 (i 8f^ ■*-> OJ c c -o Ul 4.> 01 3 ^' «; .« O .u O +^ H R •m s-a T) «j « J2 2i Jj Wl rt t/i u .u (/) 3.Q :: •d to W T1 (U +-> 1) 4-> a Q c S 01 JJ B o >> o u f) -tJ '*-' (1) V fc tn O C O O c o 4J c H a *J •n .2 c d (U c 0) ti e 3 v2 3 "y *t-i (U 3 ♦J (U ^n o 1 a (U c r-- 373 ij (T e c j= o M a ■*^ C r^ u O a c Li c ,^ •J u W) ^\ o 60 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. O w O -•-> rt 0 »^ -•CN 'fr^oOOf c ^^'G u O .-1 ■ ID •^ 00 tM m >A) ir> -^ flj nl o a; a O f^ • O^ 4) O « -co c^ 00 0^ 00 00 00 P, 00«-l Q^ £1 *^ rt O '^ 1 V ?> fc to O O r-« fo 00 ro l/^ «'> •'I ;s o •a O -r o -< CO I/-) "^ 00 l^'J O ^ t/5 •So-g e O -f CM >0 U-, •^ w^ CM 00 <0 o 4; O tM r^ >0 CO ro -> 'o 5J Cfl 4> ol^ & • fao c S O'S O ^ 'I' — Tt ro CN ■^ CN \j h-i r^ O C4 vo ---^i/o \0 01 0_ . *: «4- ^■-'Tj. -. oT-* •^ «■ ft :S O s 'c c T3 4> 2 VO 00 ro •f- >o "^ t^ CN 10 ro C^l ^ » J>g-« (0 C O T}< — r^ t^ u-j 10 -^ M V (-H O ■ r; 4j X '+3 rt ^ O 3 ~j -^ O t^ >* 5 O OM to 0) C> r>._ ro c ■'* fO t>. O 0" ^ — r-T vd" ^ ^in ro •** .s wOi- 5 <-l ^H ■«• -M ■«» s38 § "55 C4 "y c Ou t-H O i^ '^ »>-) CN «~- 10 — ro U3 to o O I/-, u-i -^ 00000 •* 0"-i •+ r^ i \rt in \ri t~~ (» q_o_co_o_ -- 00 r^ •<1' ^ ^"vo"'* t^ o"\o 0" 10 ^ ro ro >-] ro 00 O lyj — f^ "^ CN Tj< «N U-) ^ r<-) (N CO ,-1 ^--u-, 0^ ro T)- r^ ^ »0 CO . i^ . f* to v^ ^H CM ^-'■* »H \n <0 cJ T** o S" V o fafl <2 l-l ro r^ 10 ^H O r- r^ -^ 00 r- •«*' «) vO ^ 10 W1 ro vr> ^ CN CO 2 w> 4 ^ 2; ^ ■(/;•■■ • 1- 1— 1 • ■ . (to -3 c • : ■ • • to C • .SB ■ oQ •0 txc ^ c • - 0) o 2 ^ 1^ .c -^r '^ •H oTp y e 3 s^ 'H o o^ o^ s 8 0"iO \n to t^ O \0 O O VO -i lo Oo'rOfO ^H Tj-'oo'cN O to CM VO o ^"-^ ^-v ,.— V V-. cS- v25 '^ w O c c8 C OO >o Ov ovo — •a ro o O OtO -< a> . «^ tooo -6 111 ^-1 fs . VO . VO •2- Rg5 -1 ::2 o s « u 3 lo 0«N «C >o»o *iH lOO o trt OS c»oo_ -^ «>. t>r (S o 00 t^ ^-t .T) r^ . . ■^ »« 0) ■^1 K s ^'S "s 11 s 73 c 14 o OOio O VO O to o\ o VO O O VO o O fN o r^ O VO r^ O o o o c^ XT) CN O lO 00 O to »0 00 '-' O O VO lo (N fO to «— 4 Ofs.^-H 0> to VO O CO t^ VO t^ y-l -"^ -/^^ S CN o to «-i t^ VO >o \o to »^ 0«S ^vO n ■l-J O c 3 < "a ■<-> tn c/I O s a. lO -S frt cS rt >> +» •a C G c O rt (U ■<-> u 4; tn C p o a o VO t/) hr ■fj T3 1 (1) -u O O o t-l B K >, ■4-" ■»-> T? !" to W S" c ^ B o 0) c .o-S I- 3*0 . C TfJS > 4)-^ W 4) O. OQ- cS o o ■»-> 4) C 4J t: 3 C o a.s Oh c s^ 4) V) o li a 1^ 3 "o c f ^ 4) C O 3 4) *^ t« '*i n to .- 3»^ 4) 4) ■o5 o ? = 3 4) Co t/1 4> tn 3 O 3 cr tn^ tn -t^ ^ „ O i-i b ° E o ?,o c 62 BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. o U3 q 0)- *- o 4) cj O 'r3 W w 3 o.S o ft) C; d) . O (« V-1 »- ■ G-n •O '■^ •O 'J* r«iOo o >- 8 ^0^0 O 00 - 00^ •Or- t- o> o o 00r>. OO ? 00 o^ O >0 O r^ O Q \rtirt g oo 0^0 •«}< o lo ^ / O lO t— C '"' r- O .- '-^ <0 00 ro W -^ COO oca O >-^ O «<) »-< O f M O CM ro CO fM O ■«.'■ "^Z •«j< o Q f^ r*i »*. NO OV ^ CM <» •>* c> o" CN CM c vn 00 00^ ' -^ t— OOO r- ,„ S O-K •^ g)^ 000 'i' CMCM C< >0'00 O ""^ O "^ "O -HCM O ^ O t— •-• r~ r^ 00 t- ~ CM CO fO O CN O PM m m CM ,^ »-" Tt CM 00 «NC OOO OOM ■-crT 00 (^ o o -«v Tf O l-"> r- o tr 00 CM ^ O ^0 "5 CO O O fM He^HhJ=' BEST'S SAN FRANCISCO REPORT. 63 o -o • O -fN • O o o o o vO OO 00 ^ o Q\ - >o to O^. 0> • 00 t-- CN o -o o • o • CM fN O (N 00 O 00 o^ o» t^ t^ o 4,500 360,289 189,518 3,500 2,500 8,093 ) o-^oooo O S o 4,469 (6)500,000 311,552 142,336 3,469 2,500 46,410 5,608 (b)500 o o rO_ 51 3,304 952,243 1,740,770 885,901 4,100 (01,000 nil. (a) 48,737 47,182 nil. 1113 ^ 696 82, 581 182,280 330,985 1,150 nil. lo o OOO lO CnT :^ o 00 nil. 191,826 118,193 640,853 nil. nil. ■S3 "S "5 '53 3 OOtooOO OOoOOO OOfOOOO OO'^'-iO OOOOO Otort0(Nt^r-40 Tj-< O "^ CN If ^-'Os CN Tj< to '-^ t^ r-» •-I CN O 00 sJi O 00 CN to «N tN wi r^ u O h w a c ^^ s a ^£ "3 4J ■(-> .iS p »rf S to orai ul -HiS oT XS -" >, rt U) C at cd >. ^ rt ta +-> rt a •n e ^ rt e '.S w rt WhJ Ats (U cd ^ d. ^ a. ctj<; 4> o o 2 ^ rt " u) O '^ S'*" O 3i22 .i:i M - rt- w C ■C_^ a t-> it V H§2 Scope of Our Service Alfred M. Best Company, Inc., are publishers who report upon the financial standing, man- agement and reputation of insurance institu- tions of all classes. It offers a variety of annual service contracts at a moderate fixed cost. Its publications are as follows: ANNUAIi 1. "Best's Insurance Reports," Fire and Marine Edition. 2. "Best's Insurance Reports," Casualty, Surety and Miscellaneous Bdition. 3. "Best's Iiife Insurance Reports." 4. "Best's Iiife Charts." 5. "Best's Revised Illustrations" of Net Costs, Cash Values, and Freniium Rates (Iiife). 6. "Best's Rate Book." 7. "Best's Insurance Guide with Key Rat- ing's." 8. "Best's Recommended Insurance Attor- neys," (with Digest of Insurance Iiaws). 9. "Best's Directory of Adjusters 8c Inves- tig'ators." 10. "Best's Digfest of Insurance Stocks." 11. "Best's Automobile Policy Chart." 12. "Best's Reproduction of the Principal Schedules of Casualty & Surety Companies." MONTHI.V 1. "Best's Insurance News," Fire and Marine Edition. 2. "Best's Insurance News," Casualty, Surety and Miscellaneous Bdition. 3. "Best's Insurance News," Life Edition. 4. "Safety Engfineering-." WEEKI.Y 1. "Best's Fire & Marine Bulletin." 2. "Best's Casualty & Surety Bulletin." 3. "Best's Iiife Bulletin." * t&tM&XM «&nt m^* UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. JUN 25 1991 DUE 2 WKS FROM DATE 1 1 THE LIBRARY TNWERSITY OF CALIFORNU LOS ANGELES I GAYLORD BROS. Inc. ' Syracuse, N.Y. ! Stockton, Calif. iiiniij III Hill iim nil 1IIII Hill mil MiiiiHii mil iiiNiii L 006 338 075 2