What did Insurance Companies have to do with the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire court case?

We're doing a mock trial in class of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire case, and as a defense lawyer for Isaac Harris and Max Blanck, I'm supposed to cross examine the "insurance company" but I have no idea what they had to do with the case.
If you have any information or any idea about the insurance company's relevance to this case, and/or what they did, and/or who they even are, can you please tell me?

Insurance companies did nothing to require incentives for factories to promote safety measures for workers. Insurance companies seemed more concerned with property than workers.

The owners of the Triangle actually had a disincentive to promote safety, as evidenced by the list of suspicious fires that took place at their various factories. Portions of the Triangle factory burned on April 5, 1902 and again on November 1 that same year, while their Diamond Waist Company factory also experienced a pair of suspicious blazes鈥攐ne in April 1907 and another in April 1910. In all four cases, the fires occurred before business hours and the owners were reimbursed by insurance companies for the surplus merchandise that was destroyed.

In essence, Blanck and Harris prepared for fires not by implementing safety measures but by purchasing large insurance policies. They conveniently neglected to install sprinkler systems and other fire safety technology because they never knew when it might become financially advantageous to burn their own shops.

Doesn't help absolve your clients but could be used for cross-examination to deflect some blame for your clients.