ACTRESS’S JEWELS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIV, Issue 18819, 6 March 1931, Page 12

ACTRESS’S JEWELS.

NO INSURANCE IN BRITAIN. COMPANIES REFUSE RISK. Insurance companies in Britain are refusing to Insure the jewels owned by actresses. Correspondence on this subject has passed between a prominent company and Miss Maisie Gay. The revue star was informed that owing to the carelessness shown by artists over their jewellery they “could not invite a continuance of the policy.” “And do you know,” said Maisie Gay in an interview, “that I’ve paid premiums for six years, and never made a claim. Not one! And think of the chances I have had to lose my furs, my two valuable pendants, and a very nice brooch I’ve got! Even if an actress did lose her jewels she would never dare to tell the newspapers about them; she would be laughed to death! I thought that old trick was as dead as the war.”

A theatre manager stated that, judging from inquiries from firms of assessors on behalf of society people who had been careless enough to mislay rings, pendants, and even diamond watches, the misplacing of trinkets was not confined to stage people. An official of the insurance company said: “The refusal of insure jewellery belonging to actresses is by no means confined to my company. There are unquestionably additional risks in such insurance, and it really amounts to this; They are not worth underwrit-

ing. "Every well known actress is a target for the activities of thieves, and the additional chances of loss in theatres and public places are considerable. Women are notoriously careless with jewellery. “We do not wish to create any illwill between the insurance world and the theatrical profession, but we must be allowed to run our business on our own lines."