Verhovayak Lapja, 1949 (32. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)

1949 / Verhovay Journal

PAGE i2

Verhovay Journal

October 19, 1949

Kossuth Memorial T ablet Unveiled In Pittsburgh

— Bronze Memorial Placed on Hotel Sheraton to Mark Site of Kossuth's

Stay in 1852. —

Observances of the centennial of the Hungarian War for Independence in 1848-49 were highlighted in Pittsburgh by the unveiling of a memorial tablet, placed on the Wood Street front of Hotel Sheraton, the former St. Charles Hotel, where Kossuth lodged as a guest of the City of Pittsburgh on January 22-31 in 1852.

Attorney Albert Fiok, Jr., Chairman of the Kossuth Committee, the Hon. David L. Lawrence, Mayor of the City of Pittsburgh and Dr. Oliver W. Elsbree, Professor of European History at the University of Pittsburgh where the speakers at the unveiling ceremony held on Wood St., and Third Avenue Corner, downtown Pittsburgh, in front of the Sheraton Hotel, on Sunday, October 2, at two o-clock in the afternoon.

Dr. Stephanie Sebastian sang the American National Anthem at the opening and the Hungarian National Anthem at the close of the ceremonies. The tablet was unveiled by Mrs. George Szecskay and Mrs. Ignatzius Lengyel.

A bust of Kossuth appears on the tablet, with the iollowing inscription: “Louis Kossuth, great Hungarian patriot, champion of Liberty, statesman and orator, Governor of Hungary in 1849, lodged in the Hotel St. Charles on this site January 22-31, 1852, as guest of the City of Pittsburgh while on a tour of the United States.

This tablet placed by the Magyars of Western Pennsylvania.”

It was George Szecskay, the well-known American Hungarian poet, who pioposed in the early 1930’s that the site of Kossuth’s stay in Pittsburgh be marked by a memorial tablet. In April 1948 tha Rev. Paul Markovits, pastor of the First Hungarian Lutheran Church of Pittsburgh, joined Mr. Szecskay in the proposal which was adopted by the Hungarian Professional Society of Pittsburgh. A Kossuth Memorial Tablet Committee was formed in February, 1949, at a meeting attended by the representatives of the churches and organizations of this area. The Committee commissioned Alexander Finta, world famous Hungarian sculptor of Los Angeles, Calif., to make the tablet the text of which was written by Mr. Szecskay.

THE LIFE INSURANCE BILL '

OF THE AMERICAN FAMILY

— After basic living expenditures, Life Insurance is most important item

in budget of average American family. —

In 1937 the Saturday Evening Post made an investigation and found out that in the country’s large urban centers 80% of the families were insured, in the smaller urban centers, 75%, and in the rural districts, 66%. In large cities, as high as 7% of the income was going into Life Insurance, and all in all it reached about 6%. It was the fifth item in the family budget. It followed only food, shelter, clothing and transportation.

There are many people who invest much less than 6% of their income in Life Insurance, yet they complain that they have too much insurance. Let’s take the modest figure of 6% as the basis in comparing our own Life Insurance investments to that of the average American family.

In the following we show how much Verhovay protection 6% of the breadwinners’ wages would buy, in three different income groups, for a young family of 3, the husband 26, the wife 23, and one child 5 months old.

I. 6% of a $60 weekly income would buy for the man a $5,000 Endowment At Age 85, for the wife a $1,000 Twenty Payment Life and for the child a $1,000 Twenty Year Endowment certificate, including Payor Benefit protection, with the Verhovay. The total monthly Life Insurance bill on this plan at our present rates is $15.73, or 6% of the average monthly earnings.

II. ) 6% of a $75 weekly income would buy a $5,000 Endowment at Age 85 for the husband, a $1,500 Twenty Payment for the wife and a $1,500 Endowment at Age 18 (Educational policy), including Payor Benefit, for the child, at a total monthly cost of $19.75, representing 6% of the average monthly earnings.

III. ) 6% of a $90 weekly income would buy a $5,000 Endowment at Age 85 for the husband, a $2,000 Twenty Payment Life for the wife and a $2,000 Endowment at Age 18 (Educational policy, incl. Payor Benefit,) for the child, at a total monthly cost of $23.05 which is a few cents less than 6% of the average monthly earnings.

The ages given are of utmost importance. If the family would delay buying life insurance for five years, 6% of the same income could not possibly pay for the same insurance plan.

Of course, the question may arise what would happen to either of the above plans if the wages of the breadwinner would fall off for some reason, like strikes, temporary lay-offs or similar conditions. To this there are two answers. First, the earnings of a 26 year old man may generally be expected to increase with the passing of years. There may be temporary slump*, but on the average the income level will become h:gher rather than lower. For the temporary slumps, on the other hand, the certificates themselves will yield sufficient protection to make the maintenance of the plan possible.

For instance, after the certificates will have been in force for only three years, the reserves on the three certificates on Plan I ($60 weekly income) would represent $202, on Plan II ($75 weekly income) $295 and on Plan III ($90 weekly income) $370, which would be available for the family in the form of loans. With each successive year these reserves will increase. At the end of the 5th year, for instance, the cash or loan value of the three certificates on Plan I. would represent $460, on Plan II. $637.50 and on Plan III. $785. (All these figures refer only to membership certificates issued on the r.ew rates, since January 1st, 1949!)

The substantial reserves available for borrowing purposes apparently will be sufficient to tide the family over difficult periods and, thereby, make it possible for them to maintain these plans which afford the most effective protection for the money invested.

It follows that according to averages, requiring the investing of 6% of the income in Life Insurance, a family of three with an income, of $60 per

The Last Tournament Financing Campaign

— What Happened To The Expense Money? —

Writing for this issue about the 1950 Tournament Financing Campaign reminds us to answer some inquiries in regards to the last financing campaign, like the one made by Jj J. Horvath who asked in his Verhovay Watchtower column of August 17: “What happened to the expense money we were supposed to get from the Prize Committee after the expenses were paid ? ? An explanation should be made, Gentlemen, if you look for cooperation next year on the same venture.”

We answered then that HOPES were expressed rather than promises that IF the Tournament Financing Campaign should come up to expectations, some funds MAY be available for such purposes. We pointed out, however, that the query already has been answered by the late Vice-President and Chairman Albert B. Ari who stated at the 1949 Tournament Banquet that “this year, though we have not been unsuccessful, we have not made 50% of our expectations.” Still, we promised further information to be forthcoming after the Board of Directors’ meeting.

Well, here we are:

Receipts ............................. $16,188.68

Disbursements .................... $17,026.90

Deficit ................................... $ 838.22

Of the receipts the entry fees totalled $4,391.00, while the rest, $11,- 797.68 represents the proceeds of the Tournament Financing Campaign, including other minor items of income.

Of the disbursements $9,789.64 represents the immediate costs of the bowling tournament (prizes, trophies, cost of bowling and score keepers, entertainment in Detroit, etc.,) $3,- 365.74 the awards made in the Grand Event of the Tournament Financing Campaign and $3,871.00 all the other costs including printing, publicity, advertising, commissions and administrative expenses, like postage, telephone, etc. (Incidentally, some of the printing expenses incurred directly in connection with the tour-Bowling News & Scores

ALLENTOWN, PA.

Branch 90

MATCH GAMES INVITED

The Verhovay Fraternal Insurance Association Branch 90 bowling team of Allentown, Pennsylvania, is looking for match-games with different branches of the Verhovay in a 75 mile area on a home to home basis. Those interested are requested to contact the manager, John Beitel,

Jr., 535 HickorySt.,

Allentown,

, Pa.

JOHNBEITEL,

JR.,

Mgr.

NEW BRUNSWICK,N. J.

Branch 518

October4,

1949

Budweiser

Slovak

194

167

147508

Devan

118

148

141

407

Kossman

146

135

119

400

Hendrickson

184

204

202

590

Heitzmann

185

206

185

576

Totals

827

860

7942481

Branch 518

J. Merkosky

181

166

151

498

Cooper

151

167

151

469

Luch

180

223

186

589

Tarantola

200

145

168

513

C. Reed

142

157

190

489

Totals 854 858 846 2558

Michael Puskas, Mgr.

nament, should be added to the costs of the tournament which, in that case, would exceed $10,000.)

At any rate, the campaign concluded with a deficit of $838.22 due to the fact that, in the words of our late Vice-President, “we have not made 50% of our expectations.” This will leave a great deal to the imagination as to what could have been accomplished if the outcome of the financing campaign would have met, say, 75% of our expectations.

And that's what happened to the expense money . . .

week should have at least $7,000, the same family with an income of $75 per week should have at least $8,000 and a similar family with an income of $90 should have at least $9,000 insurance, on plans as outlined above, which give the husband the highest amount of insurance for the lowest rates, the wife the highest amount on the limited payment plan of 20 years, and the child an Endowment the size and purpose of which must depend on what the family can afford to invest in the future of their child.

If there are more children, the plan must be adjusted accordingly, but never at the expense of the breadwinner’s basic protection. On the other hand, if the breadwinner’s income increases, more should be added to the original plan to keep the Life Insurance investments on the minimum 6% level.

It should be kept in mind that 6% is not the maximum, but the average. As the Saturday Evening Post’s investigation proved, families in large urban communities invest on the average 7%, which means that there are many who spend 5 and 6%, and just as many who invest 8 and 9% in Life Insurance.

In closing it should also be mentioned that one may spend more than 6% on Life Insurance, yet have less protection than has been shown' above. Others may spend less and have more protection. In either case, it would be right to assume that the life insurance program of the family has not been planned properly. If the father and the mother as well as the child have Whole Life or Endowment At Age 85 policies, the cost may be less than 6%, or if 6% is spent, the amount of insurance may be far above the basic amounts shown. In proper insurance planning, however, neither a 23 year old housewife, nor a 5 month old child should have Endowment At Age 85 certificates. On the other hand, if Endowment certificates are purchased for all the three members of the family, either the cost of the plan will be higher, or the amount of the insurance protection would be lower. The plan would be wrong in either case, because in the income groups shown above the breadwinner should buy the most protection for the least rather than invest his limited resources in the luxury of an Endowment plan which, in the case of the head of the family, is warranted only if the family is sufficiently protected by resources other than life insurance.

We' have every reason to believe that a great many families in the Verhovay maintain insurance programs which are below the American average and which, therefore, are in urgent need of proper adjustment.