The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, June 3, 1918, Page 17

- Hail Insurance in Montana Nonpartisan League Proposals for Improving the State Law Are Not Objected to by One Official : Helena, Mont. Editor Nonpartisan Leader: § : : I have just completed the reading of Mr. Gilbert’s article entitled “Talfing.t.he Gamble Out.of Hail Storms.” The article furnishes very pertinent information regarding the much-talked of Canadian compulsory hail insurance laws. Your attention is called to the statement of the Saska_tchewan losses by years since 1918. This gives the losses in 1917 as paid on a basis of 51 per cent. This must be an error, because I have the auditor’s report which shows that the losses were paid in full and that the year’s business left a surplus of $68,314.83. < The enactment of these laws and their successful administration by Saskatchewan and Alberta has proven without doubt that the state is capable of administering these departments so as to save great sums for the farmers. - W, I note that Mr. Gilbert failed to make any mention of the business done by the state hail insurance department of Montana last year. I would like to call your attention briefly to the 1917 business. The losses were paid at $12 per acre and amounted to $61,600. The total outlay for operating the law was $4,700, and a surplus fund of $40,200. is held. In other words, for every dollar collected, 58 per cent went to pay losses, 4.4 per cent went to pay for the administration of the law and 37 per cent is held in a reserve fund to assist in paying future.losses. ’ Mr. Gilbert makes the statement that, “Whenever the losses exceed .. the amount collected the fund on hand is prorated among those who have . suffered loss; consequently a farmer can never be sure whether he is fully insured or not.” ' This statement is correct, and this method is the same as that used in paying the losses in Saskatchewan. I favor the Alberta plan of paying the losses in full every year. The farmers who pay the levy will not mind it as much if the amount they have to pay varies in different years as the farmers who sustain the losses. It would ' seem to be much better for a man to know that when the season’s losses are settled he will receive a definite sum. . Mr. Gilbert states that under the Montana law, “The losses are lim- ited by law to $12 per acre for grain and $6 per acre for hay crops; consequently full losses can never be paid in many cases even where there are sufficient funds in the treasury.” True, the payment of losses is limited as stated, in just the same manner as they are in Alberta and Saskatchewan, also in the North Dakota and Nebraska laws. The Mon- tana Equity’s insurance companies, which write a big line in Montana, limit their losses too. I wonder if your readers fully understand the latter part of Mr. Gilbert’s statement, and I am frank to say that I do- not. Would like to see it explained further. The Montana hail insurance law was introduced by Senator O’Shea, who has been so successfully managing the Federal Land bank of Spokane since its inauguration. The first year’s operation of the law clearly shows the possibilities of benefit to the farmers under the law. The Canadian provinces have amended their hail insurance laws annually since their enactment and are still at it, so it would not seem out of place if the first draft of the Montana law should prove to be partially incomplete. This department is not opposed to amendments to the Mon- farmers better service at less cost. L BY A. B.'GILBERT R. BOWMAN is un- doubtedly correct in stating that the 1917 hail losses in Saskatchewan were paid in full because he has at hand the report covering the 1917 ' crop season; ‘whereas my figure of 51 per cent was taken from a report is- sued February 28, 1917, and really be- longed with the 1916 crop season. The important - point, however, is, as Mr. Bowman brings out later, that the ~~Saskatchewan plan does not ‘promise ‘the maximum payment of $5 an acre " and that the collections fell far short of losses in @ bad year. Consequently the farmer there does not know how much he is insured for until the crop season is passed. LOW COST IN MONTANA The prorata plan which' makes the amount of insurance depend upon the weather conditions is certainly' very undesirable. THE BAD YEAR IS “JUST . THE YEAR WHEN [PHE FARMERS NEED FULL INSUR- ANCE PAYMENTS. Mr. Bowman, 1 am glad to find, agrees heartily with this point. In fact, any one who has - studied insurance would probably be tana law-or to the:enactment of a hail insurance law that will give the Chairman, Montana State Board of Hail Insurance. E. K. BOWMAN, All goes well if hail losses are small, but in a bad year the farmers are confronted with part payments. The low cost of operation in Mon- tana, only $4.40 out of every $100 col- lected, is an even better showing than that made by Saskatchewan and Al- berta because it was the first year of business and because the amount of business was much smaller. If I had a copy of the Montana report at hand, I would certainly , have used this point. X : ¢ Private companies would have need- ed several times this amount for ex- penses alone, not to mention profits. In North Dakota, for instance, over : WHITE COAL PULLING ON A TEXAS ROAD Here is a tractor with a 17-ton load. The test was made under the supervision of the United States government on the road out of Marfa, Texas. The machine made a round trip of 500 miles without accident or delay. The highway is one of the worst in Texas, having many steep hills and dangerous turns, and alter- nate stretches of sand, gravel, stones, mud and water. the-six years of 1909-1914 inclusive, the private companies paid out in ° losses only 69 per cent of the collec- tions; yet they complain that t}\eir business in that state has been un- profitable. That it 'is unprofitable shows not the need of more revenue but THE EXTREME INEFFICIEN- CY OF PRIVATELY MANAGED HAIL INSURANCE. PAYMENT IN FULL ¢ Mr. Bowman declares that he does not understand my point that with hail losses limited to $12 an acre, full losses in many cases can not be paid. The full, actual loss on crop land may not be paid because the maximum of $12 established in 1917 is probably far short of the farmer’s loss when the crop is totally destroyed. Cer-. tainly in 1918 the cost of bringing an acre of wheat to the point of harvest will be more than $12 an acre. Fire insurance has to be limited to a percentage of full value for the obvious reason that the insured owner might be tempted otherwise to cause a fire, but no farmer can cause a hail storm. Consequently the ideal system would provide payment of hail losses " in full and not a set maximum. At least the maximum ought to be chang- ed from year to year as the cost of producing crops increases. It is gomewhat unfair, however, to bring this criticism against the Montana plan because no other «state system provides for paying actual losges. But, on the other hand, why should democratic America lag behind other parts of the world in legislation for farmers? Why not be first oc- casionally ? OBJECTIONS TO MONTANA PLAN There are, however, three other im- portant objections .to the Montana plan which should be removed as soon as possible: 1. It is voluntary . with the individual farmer. 2. It does not raise part of the revenue at least by a flat land . tax on idle as well as on used lamnd. 3. It has the pro-, rata method of pay- ing losses. On the third objection gives no reason for think- -ing he does not agree with the other two. But Mr. “Bowman and the insur- | Mr. Bowman . expresses : ' ggreement, and his letter : mental that THE FARMERS WILL HAVE TO ORGANIZE TO CAP- TURE THE LEGISLATURE TO GET THEM REMOVED. The anti-farmer interests have a way of meeting the demand for progressive measures by providing the thing desired wijth so many weak points and so many strings attached that it can never amount to much. They gave North Dakota a ridiculous state hail insur- ance system several years ago. Few people have ever heard of it because the law was allowed to pass only be- cause it would be a failure. There is but one way by which the farmers can get a good systerh of state hail insurance and that is to send their own men to the legislature. War Job for a Packer HE farmers and stock . raisers of the West will be delighted to hear that one of the great packers is going to do his duty —— to the mnation. in the _trenches. Don’t believe it? Well, here is a reproduction of a story that appeared in the city newspapers: MILLIONAIRE IN DRAFT Exemption Plea of Nelson Morris, Packing Magnate, Rejected, Chicago, May 17.—Chicago’s next quota will contain a milllonaire mem- ber in Nelson Morris, packing mag- nate. j Mr. Morris’ plea -for industrial ex- emption and being a “dollar-a-year volunteer” was rejected today. Mr. Morris is to be congratulated over his rise from an “eight bit” a year patriot to a $30 a month patriot. SORE IN NEBRASKA Round Valley, Neb. Editor Nonpartisan Leader: I have been a reader of your paper for six months and I like it very much, . because it has got the real stuff. It is a paper which -should be read by all farmers. We need moré good men -in this state to help organize. I am enclosing a clipping which I cut out of the Omaha Daily News. S ‘EDGAR LEE. The clipping ‘was a news report from Washington, D. C., which ,re- ferred to the slanderous attacks on the members of the Nonpartisan if === = , T 1= it § i B H E, g :league, made by Judge J. F. McGee before the senate committee on mili- tary affairs.—THE EDITOR. against the prorata plan for it is an . One of the big pawer ‘enterprises in sofithém -ance dgpgrtment are not unwarranted method of making col- Idaho. This shows the outlet to the canal of the . the legislature, and these lections lower than they should be. : Arrow Rock dam near quse. ST 'ob;ectxons are 8o fupda- G : PAGE SEVENTEEN P e