fire insurance companies which ceased to do business for various causes in 1918.

The Bankers and Merchants Fire of Indianapolis, Ind., and Merchants National, Chicago, Ill., merged as the Western Alliance Fire, and the following changes in name were made in 1918: German Alliance, New York, to American Alliance; German American, New York, to Great American; German-American, Pittsburgh, Pa., to United American; German-American Fire, Baltimore, Md., to Baltimore American; German-American Fire, Washington, D. C., to American Fire of the District of Columbia; German Fire, Baltimore to Central Fire; German Fire, Pittsburgh, to Globe; German Fire, Louisville, Ky., to Liberty Fire; German Fire, Peoria, Ill., to Illinois Fire; German Fire, Wheeling, W. Va., to Wheeling Fire; Germania Fire, New York, N. Y., to National Liberty; Germania Underwriters to Washington Underwriters; Home Fire, Salt Lake City, Utah, to Utah Home; Humboldt Fire, Pittsburgh, Pa., to Superior Fire; Liverpool and London and Globe, New York, N. Y., to Star of America; Teutonia Fire, Dayton, O., to Reliable Fire; Teutonia Fire, Pittsburgh, Pa., to Republic Fire.

RELIABLE FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, THE., of Dayton, Ohio. Organized 1865; cash capital $1,075,336. Wm. F. Oelman, president; C. H. Frank, vice-president; William F. Kramer, secretary.

RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY of Philadelphia was incorporated 1841. Capital, $400,000. William Chubb, president; Charles J. Wister, vice-president; William W. Haig, secretary, 429 Walnut Street.

RELIANCE MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, THE (Limited), Liverpool, Eng. W. L. H. Simpson, attorney and manager, New York.

RENT INSURANCE.* Anyone who has a pecuniary interest in the preservation and protection of property and who might sustain a loss by reason of its destruction, has an interest in such property which is insurable. It follows, therefore, that a landlord may insure against loss of rents, and a tenant may insure against his continuing liability to pay rent, regardless of the occurrence of a fire.

Whether a landlord has an insurable interest to support a policy of fire insurance on rents, where the tenant is obligated unconditionally to pay rent in full, is a question concerning which there is some difference of opinion; but the courts would probably have no difficulty in discovering an insurable interest if on no ground other than that the fire might impair the ability of the tenant to pay rent. If, however, after the fire, the tenant should pay the rent in full, the landlord would be unable to show a loss. But, if the landlord should recover his rent insurance, the insurer making payment would become subrogated to the claim against the tenant. Rents, however, are not covered by an insurance upon the building, but liability must be specifically assumed thereon.

There are many different forms of rent policies, but those in most general use provide that the insurer shall make good the loss of rents actually sustained by the insured on occupied or rented portions of the premises which have become untenantable, for and during such time as, with the exercise of due diligence, may be necessary for the restoration of the premises to the same tenantable condition as before the fire. A form thus phrased covering on occupied or rented portions of the premises, is regarded as sufficiently broad to cover that portion of the premises occupied by the insured himself, and not rented. Some forms, however, remove all elements of doubt on this point by expressly declaring that, if the insured occupies any portion of the building, a fair rental value of the portion so occupied shall be considered as a part of the rents.

Insurance is also written at an advanced rate to cover loss of rents or rental value to the premises, whether occupied or vacant at the time of the fire. The theory upon which this class of insurance is based is that the premises have a value as rentable property and may be rented at any time; hence, if they are destroyed by fire, the insured may be deprived of the income which might otherwise accrue to him.

The older forms contain the co-insurance or average clause (usually the one hundred per cent) based on the annual rental or rental value, as the case may be; but in some of the later forms, this provision is modified in favor of the insured, in consideration of a higher premium, by changing the basis from the twelve month to the time that would reasonably be required to restore the premises to a tenantable condition, if totally destroyed.

Most of the forms in current use cover on rents and agree to make good the "loss on rents actually sustained." The question naturally arises whether this means gross rents or whether it means gross rents less those expenses which may be saved to the insured during the period of reconstruction, such as lighting, heating, elevator service, By William N. Bament, general adjuster, The Home Insurance Company, New York, N. Y.

janitor service, collections, insurance, and the like. There has been comparatively little litigation involving rent insurance; therefore, we have only general principles and analagous decisions to guide us in reaching our conclusions.

It is possible, of course, that the courts might declare a policy thus phrased to be valued, and if so it would be construed like any other valued policy and the insurer would be liable for loss of gross rent without any deductions therefrom. It is, however, the well-considered opinion of some of the best legal minds that, in view of the strong inclination on the part of the courts to adhere in their decisions to the fundamental principle of indemnity, they would hardly go out of their way to discover a valued feature in a policy where none is expressed and where there is no evidence, except such as is remotely inferential, of its existence.

If the policy is not valued, it should be construed like any other contract of indemnity; and there is no logical reason why, on rents rather than on any other class of property, one should recover more than his actual loss. The fact that the policy limits liability to loss on rents "actually sustained " lends emphasis, if any were needed, to the view that the policy is not valued; and these words, if they have any significance whatever, should be controlling.

Our highest courts have held that, where there is a contract of indemnity and a loss happens, anything which reduces or diminishes that loss reduces or diminishes the amount that the indemnifier is bound to pay, and the insured is entitled only to be placed in the same condition, pecuniarily, that he would have been if there had been no fire.

In the light of the authorities, it seems clear that, unless the policy should be declared valued, it is incumbent upon the insured (under a rent policy) to prove what his actual net loss is, after making proper deduction for everything in the way of salvage that may come to him. In many cases there would be no diminution in the regular running expenses; but in event of a serious damage too, or the total destruction of the building, there might and probably would be quite a material saving in expenses, and, if so, this would be a very important factor.

Nearly all rent losses are partial; the forms, covering simply on 46 rents " and differing somewhat in phraseology, have been in use for many years; the loss record has not been unfavorable; very little difficulty has been experienced in adjustments; settlements are usually made on a compromise basis, and many claimants, no doubt, take into consideration the salvage in expenses in their negotiations, so that the question does not arise very frequently as a practical proposition.

In some portions of the country, however, notably on the Pacific Coast, evidently with a view to avoiding discussion, policies are issued covering net rents or net rental income; but the practical effect of this form will be to permit the insured to collect his gross rent in many instances (because all expenses frequently continue in event of partial loss), whereas the coinsurance or average clause will be applied to the annual net rental; hence in cases of partial loss such form would be quite advantageous to the insured.

REPUBLIC FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF TEXAS, Dallas, Texas. Organized 1919; capital, paid in, $1,000,000. Geo. W. Jalonick, president; I. Jalonick, vice-president, J. B. Adoue, vicepresident; A. F. Pillet, secretary; J. H. Hines, assistant secretary; T. R. Mansfield, assistant secretary. Fire and marine insurance.

REPUBLIC FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Pittsburgh, Pa. Organized 1871; capital, $200,000. C. W. Gerwig, president; E. C. Gerwig, vice-president; N. A. Weed, secretary.

RESIDENT AGENTS' LAWS. Laws requiring policies of insurance to be placed through "regularly commissioned and licensed agent, resident in the state are with two or three exceptions in force in all states and apply to fire insurance. In a few states the laws are general, applying to all, or any form of insurance, while in a larger number the laws are made to apply to the placing of the different lines of casualty or miscellaneous insurance as well as fire insurance. As a rule regular life insurance companies and assessment and fraternal associations are exempt. The following is a statement of the laws now in force with date of enactment:

Alabama (1907); Arizona (1913 and 195); Arkansas (1901 and 1903); Colorado (1907 and 1915); Connecticut (1893); Delaware (1901 and 1917); Florida (1899 and 1903); Georgia (1896 and 1901); Hawaii (1903); Idaho (1911, 1913, and 1915); Illinois; Iowa (1897); Kansas; Kentucky (1916); Louisiana (1902 and 1916); Maine (1903, 1905, and 1913); Maryland (1900); Massachusetts (1907); Michigan (1912); Minnesota (1905); Mississippi (1902 and 1916); Missouri (1897); Montana (1907); Nebraska (1909); Nevada (1901): New Hampshire (1899 and 1911); New Jersey, New Mexicao (1901 and 1913); North Carolina (1905); North Dakota (1905); Ohio (1917); Oklahoma (1909); Oregon (1899); Pennsylvania (1899); Rhode Island (1896); South Carolina (1900 and 1915); South Dakota (1895); Tennessee (1899); Texas (1903); Utah (1907); Vermont (1908); Virginia (1906); Washington (1911); West Virginia (1901); Wisconsin (1911); Wyoming (1910 and 1915). [For full text of laws see Cyclopedia for 1913-14 and 1915.]

The laws of all the above states apply to fire insurance, and the law of Alabama specifically mentions life insurance, while also applying to all other classes of companies. The laws of Arizona, Idaho, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming are general, applying to any and all companies. The laws of Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas contain special provisions applying to the different classes of casualty, or miscellaneous companies, and the laws of New Jersey, Mississippi and Utah apply to all companies, except life, and, in the case of Mississippi, individuals, firms or corporations indemnifying themselves through reciprocal contracts are exempt. Louisiana exempts policies of "life and endowment insurance which include provisions for the waiver of premiums or other benefit in the event of accident or other disability," and policies of reinsurance. Kentucky also exempts mutual companies and inter-insurance associations.

The Colorado law prohibits the licensing of any one as agent, broker, or solicitor who is not a resident of the state, and the Kansas law prohibits the commissioner from licensing anyone not a resident of the state. The Alabama, Nebraska, and Texas laws requires a company to file an affidavit that it has not violated any provisions of the act for the preceding twelve months, and the Minnesota law requires a company to appoint as "its agents in the state residents thereof."

Some of the laws contain other special features, particularly relating to division of commissions. Delaware, Idaho, Montana, Mississippi, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, North Dakota, Utah, Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia require that the agent countersigning the policy shall "receive the full commission thereon when the premium is paid." Wisconsin requires that the agent countersigning the policy" shall be paid the commission on the policy, and Louisiana requires that the authorized agent shall receive on each policy. . . the full usual commission allowed and paid."

The laws in the following states make no mention of commissions, Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota: Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, Missouri, and Kentucky.

The commissioners of Michigan and Wyoming have ruled that agents cannot divide commissions with non-resident agents or brokers, while the attorney general of Kansas has ruled that division of commissions and exchange of business with non-residents is not illegal. The Ohio department has ruled that agents doing business in Ohio must be residents of Ohio and licenses will not be issued to non-residents.

The law of New Mexico prohibits any agent, broker, or solicitor "to pay or promise to pay either directly or indirectly any fee, brokerage, or other emolument of any nature to any non-resident person, firm, or corporation "for the obtaining, placing, or writing " of any policy of insurance covering property in New Mexico. Kansas prohibits any authorized company from authorizing or allowing any non-resident person, agent, firm or corporation from issuing or causing to be issued any policy on property in the state. Vermont requires all policies to be countersigned by a duly authorized resident agent of the company issuing the policy, although brokers' licenses may be granted “to persons resident in any other state, if the laws of such state permit the issuance of brokers' licenses to residents of this state."

66

The laws of Nebraska and Texas prohibit any company from authorizing, allowing, or permitting any non-resident to issue, sign, countersign, or to deliver or cause to be delivered any policy" except through licensed resident agents of such companies. North Carolina and South Carolina permit the division of commissions between nonresident and resident agents.

RESULTS OF FIRE UNDERWRITING IN THE UNITED STATES. [See National Board of Fire Underwriters; also statistics at close of fire section.]