Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 48).pdf/672

 Helena, Mont. It seems that this letter was not received by the company until some two or three weeks later. The body of the letter is as follows:

“Find inclosed reinstatement application of Henry Boerger; also a six months’ note for the premium. Mr. Boerger wants to carry this insurance. He had almost a total failure of crop last year, and had planted a large acreage. His plans are to put in a big crop this year.

“Mr. Boerger owns an improved 320-acre farm and has a small mortgage on the farm. Trusting with this information before you, you will find it good business, and reinstate him, I am,

Yours very truly, J. A. Haigh.”

March 13th the defendant company replied to Haigh’s letter as follows:

“We have received the application for reinstatement of policy No. 11949, together with note which is returned herewith.

“I regret to say, Mr. Haigh, that we are not permitted to accept bank form notes for full first renewal premiums. Would it be possible to handle this note in any other way?

“We inclose a company form note which we would be quite willing to consider in this matter if accompanied by a cash deposit of $109.90.

“The least amount of cash that I am permitted to accept with a note in extension of the first renewal premium is arrived at by taking the short-term rate which you will find in the rate book at the insured’s attained age and multiplying the monthly premium per thousand by the number of thousands of insurance and then by the number of months from the due date of premium to due date of note.

“Would it not be possible for Mr. Boerger to borrow locally enough to accept this proposition?

“We also inclose blank application for reinstatement because the one which was sent in was filled out, ‘I hereby represent that since the 17th day of November, 1918.’ We would like to say that the reinstatement blank must show his condition since the date of the policy, and not merely since the due date of the premium. In this case, for example, he might have had a serious accident or illness in September, 1918, and in that case the question was correctly answered by him, but the company would not be protected. I know that Mr. McGowan would not have witnessed the application and handled the matter had he had any doubts of the ap-