The Locomotive - Lighthouse Survival Blog
The Locomotive - Lighthouse Survival Blog
The Locomotive - Lighthouse Survival Blog
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
174 THE LOCOMOTIVE. [:November,<br />
selves of responsibility for their safe working condition upon the ground that the insur-<br />
ance of their boilers is to them a guarantee of safety; but the Commissioners have<br />
uniformly refused to accept a \i\ea of this kind, and have laid it down that the responsi-<br />
bility for the condition of a boiler rests upon the owner or user, and not upon the insur-<br />
ance companies, and that in ])oint of law they [the insurance companies] are at perfect<br />
liberty to insure a boiler which is entirely worn out, if they choose to take the risk.~ On<br />
the other hand the Commissioners have impressed upon the companies the consideration<br />
that, having regard to the safety of life, the insurance of a boiler ought always to be<br />
based upon a thorough examination. [It may be said, parenthetically, that in this<br />
country, where the liability of the boiler insurance company frequently runs up to<br />
$40,000 or $50,000, it would hardly be necessary for the Commissioners to 'advise' any<br />
reputable company to make a thorough inspection of the boiler before insuring it ! In<br />
England, we believe, the liability of the insurance company is always quite small; and<br />
in that case a not very scrupulous companj' might sometimes be tempted to gamble on<br />
the chance of explosion. Hence the wisdom of the Commissioners' admonition. Ed.]<br />
Decisions in these terms have been publicly delivered upon several occasions, but it is<br />
due to the companies to add that while in some few cases policies have been issued<br />
before a thorough examination has taken place, they do not in practice take extreme<br />
risks; and further, that they are usually found to make reasonable efforts to examine a<br />
boiler before it is covered by insurance. <strong>The</strong> whole question of insurance of boilers,<br />
like that of marine insurance, undoubtedly involves many and complicated considerations.<br />
It is sufficient for the present purpose to say that these investigations prove that insur-<br />
ance operates as a preventive of explosions in spite of certain difficulties. <strong>The</strong> companies<br />
provide for ' working examinations,' and 'thorough examinations,' and they occasionally<br />
insure boilers after a working examination, in expectation of obtaining an opportunity<br />
for a thorough examination within a reasonable time. <strong>The</strong> insurance usually covers a<br />
period of twelve months, and although efforts are made to obtain a thorough examination<br />
before its expiration, it is frequently inconvenient to the owner to stop the working<br />
of his boiler for the purpose, and consequently no such examination takes j^lace. In the<br />
absence of a report of a thorough examination within the twelve months many of the<br />
companies would refuse to renew the policy, and a reckless owner may then transfer<br />
his risk to another company, and the same result may follow in the succeeding year.<br />
This is no doubt done in certain cases, but, so iar as can be ascertained, in only a very<br />
few. Insurance of this kind is of course worse than useless as a preventive of explosions.<br />
Again, it is found that many steam users do not, so to speak, rush after insurance. On<br />
the contrary, in outlying districts it is frequently only by considerable persuasion on the<br />
part of the insurance company's agent that the owner is induced to insure his boiler at<br />
all, and in the absence of insurance or compulsory examination it is kept working by<br />
the owner in ignorance of its condition until it leaks or explodes. <strong>The</strong> culpable reckless-<br />
ness of some owners is occasionally displayed in another form. In two cases it has trans-<br />
pired that proposals for insurance having been refused on account of the condition of<br />
the boiler by one company, the owner obtained insurance with another company, con-<br />
cealing the fact of the previous refusal. This conduct was of course condemned by the<br />
Commissioners in severe terms. <strong>The</strong> mere fact of making insurance companies and<br />
their inspectors parties to these investigations when necessary has had, and will, I think,<br />
continue to have, a beneficial effect in making the companies more careful in accepting<br />
proposals for insurance, in inducing them to employ competent and thoroughly trained<br />
inspectors, and in making those inspectors extremely careful in their examinations. <strong>The</strong>