Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1880-12-02

New CASTLE. Nov. 29-Court met at IN
a M, aud the case of the Delaware state
riie ana Marine Insurance Company against
Mulam L. Crousdale was resumed MIR
Nilolcy, having recovered from his hate
ihulHPosltlon, appeared this morning for I'M,
nrst Time III the case since last tuesday.
WILLIAM q. GIBBONS.
Mlnlam Ii. Gibbons, affirmed I'm p-esi-
dent OF the Pusey x Jones Uomnsuv an :,
member OF the boards OF directors of thc
Farmers Mutual Fire Insurance ,'onnnt,y
anu the belhware Fire Insurance COMPANY
80" ~ years Slhe3 Vie attention of the buard
OF directors q the Farmers Insurance Gn,i'
pahy WAH called to the fact that wewcre a.i,.,d
70 insure property in conjunction with Ira
'cla"are state Fire and Marine Ll.sulanre
company, That Is to say that both comnn,,io',
were asked to write on The same nniio,.'', >
t t question came up, III how far we war,
Justified III dong lhis. were
,rnt o@tlou your attention to this ~
Tgr!oN'uu ", bht, after argument, adnIttrd
4. MllleHs-lt reached the ears OF tnn Hnard
tlat TINS company was tnangiallv nn,nr',J
anu MOI wishing to dc snem any iniurv IN
a'is respect, the F2gmers' Mutual Ins,irnrc,,
;V'p"iiN uGuslod an Investigation urivatniy
mo the condition of the company tbe ,,,,r
~ "' ms investigation WAS for the Interests
", Ihu FARMERS Insurance Company and mo-
unui M,int WHY. they wanted to protect them
serves and they did not wish 10 cn.insnr, ,,ti,
a. company that would not be EkrIy ~ rn'.
Their policies. -'"'iS W Day
Mll yua explain why the Farmers,
Insurance. Company would be at specinl risL
- writing with this company II il wns
liahclally unsound y ""'
hill h the event Of partial loss, the marty
49, ui'uren IN two companies one sonn1
alu 'ho other unsound, the sound one mirht
20 tNNlulIGu 10 Of
utherWise would have to pay. That was n,,,.
Ie"Son lor my apprehension Another rnos,',,
"a9 tu"t We did pat care to be nssncintoJ
VII, VII a'y COMPANY that might hesitate IN,
prompt p0yment OF LOSSES" Al
IA " committee that investigated the u G
90 vs. ~ WAS made up Of one member
Sach oil the boards of directors ~ H..
Farmers Mutual Insurance Comnonv IL H.
NoW ,aStle Comfy Mutual Insurance Cnm-
p"is anu Inc Delaware Fire Insurance Com
p"n. : tnc7e three comprise the old home
companies OF Wilmington; the cnmn,it,n'.
was appointed about two or Two nnd nDhaif
i aso all the gentlemen of the commit
,latin1' 's a'A VT more months in this investi-
CATION, as they had leisure the commi,t,,,
VAS composed of GeDyso Richardson frnr,
me view castle County Insurance romnnr,,
'eoree W. Stone from the Delaware F,rn l.,
s4rahoS company, | represented the Farmer,
4HsnAl Insurance Company as a prelimIn,,rv
VI 'h's investigation. We obtained q certlfied
1IuuPE Vi tlh statement of the DxIawnre ,totn
rhe ai'a Marine Insurance talnpuny ms rs,,-
uoiou u me insurance commissioners of In.
:lsatu vi MarylaA.t, Statement shown and
isnt i' tadt gave us access TO 1hn
'ul''iIiS "f tholr assets. setting forth their
Sntue het OF ASSETS as sworn to by me oHirer..
alu tileii we went to work. taking them M,
ule hlier the other. to Investigate their value.
we LOOK Them each by itself and lnye,ti,atsd
ouoh ~ ltsel' aiid made report to The ra'
'PeeuNo companies accordingly {naner
sn ii,) TINS Is the report made BY the cn,n'
mites II Is IN my handwriting and il il
atsneu uE Tue members of tae committee . ~
MAS published in whole III newspaper in
"itiiiii6.oh IL was published in part in yari-
,'or. @ aice lofnals 1t was quite long re-.
Pm M anu II was made to the company.
IN ihe ~, original report of the committee was
oilui "a IN evidence and objected to Inv
II NY, 'or ihe plaintiff, on the ground that
thn "a' matter OF private information 10
to the CASE 'A ho' pertinent
Defendants counsel REPLIED that tbo, ,.,,.a
ready to submit either the orrinsl ra,;ar we're
the report as published in the Eyrpy Eyps, vi
OF November 25th, 1878. The nIaint;s ~ M
put copies of the EVERY EvFyISe Of Na,.a naa
Der 18th and 9th IN evidence to NEW 0 'nsi
ana an the report was admissible in rehpit"i ee
the presumption of malice. '''ai vi
Inc Celut thought that, while tba ,..
mas niadlnissible, the witness could 60 ~.
Suostalce OF 1t from memory. ''A'e 'no
Mr.; Bates argued that the r-nar. s,,,..,,
ieast pe read before the n,ry rha ,,ia;,i.i or
comes here to offer Just such articaps ai tron