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


was acquainted with the reputation of the
Delaware State Fire and Marine Insurance
Company during the years of 1877, '7S and
70; Its reputation for financial soundness WAS
bad have never known any risk to be
placed in the Delaware State Fire and Marine
Insurance Company through any other Will
mlngton company have known risks to be
placed In other Wilmington companies by the
agents with whom l have been employed !;
the reason risks were not placed In the Della
ware State Fire and Marine Insurance Com
pany is because 1t was regarded az not sound.
Cross-examined-Will be rs years old on
the first day Of next January went into the
insurance business in 1870.
Redirect-Witness was handed copy of the
Spectator and identified it as one of the lead
ing insurance journals of the United States {;
all the insurance agencies with which have
been connected take it; it came to the office
of l.. r. Buck & Co., while WAS there, and
suppose it is received there yet ii was sub
scribed to and paid for.
The copy of the Spectator containing an
attack on the Delaware State Fire and Marine
insurance Company was offered in evidence
Mr.. Lore objected and demanded to know
the object fits introduction.
Mr.. Bird explained that number of wit
nesses, Mr.. Paris 4. Carlisle among them,
had testified that the losses of the company
due to the attacks that had been made on the
company. and the Spectator was offered to
show that there are other attacks in public
journals besides those of EVERY EVENING.
The Court decided that the paper was adj
misslble in evidence, and it was placed upon
nile.
j. WILKINS coocH.
]. Wilkins Cooch, sworn-Am member
of the State Senate, and during the last ses-
special JOINT committee on insurance had M
interview with Mr.. Bright with respect to an
amended charter for the Delaware State Fire
and Marine Insurance Company, II bill for
which was then pending IN the Senate; Mr..
Bright called to see me about the bill | told
MIN that | had seen it stated that certain
mortgages held by the company had not been
recorded; he replied that they were the
property OF Mr.. johnson, and that he had
put them in in that way 10 that he could
withdraw them if he wanted to.
Cross examined-I saw the statement about
the mortgages not being recorded in EVERY
EVENING | think Mr.. Bright said to me
when | asked him about it that the unre-
corded mortgages belonged TO q. ?. johnson
and that they were not recorded because he
might want to take them out and substitute
others in their place.
WILLIAM HERBERT.
William Herbert sworn-Was never q
director of the Delaware State Fire and
Marine Insurance Company my name was
published as a director without my
knowledge it was without my consent and
knew nothing about it; my attention was
called to it by a publication of the company
the next day | wrote card to the EVERY
EVENING announcing that declined to serve
| my reason was that did not care to associate
| myself with some of the officers of the com.
pany at one time held a policy in the com.
| pany but allowed it to run out for want OF
faith ; know tho reputation of the company
| for financial soundness i'll 1877, '7S and 70 IL
| New Castle county it was bad.
| Cross-exalnined- decline to answer the
| question az to who was the officer of the
company with whom did not like to associate
| and for which reason | declined to act
as one Of its directors.
Mr.. Lore insisted upon an answer, and ap
| pealed to the Court. The Chief Justice di-
| rected the witness to answer.
| Mr. Herbert-Tho officer with whom I die
/ not wish to associate was James II
| Myers did not say to Mr.. Bright that if h,
had put my name down al director L would
have served what | did say to him was, tina
| had known that he was connected with the
| company | would have seen HIM before pub
lished my card that is all | said to him bu
| would not have served in any event.
| JAMES BRADFORD.
James Bradford, sworn-Reside in vii
| mington ; am largely engaged in real estate
| have not sold much lately, but would be glat
| to If any of you want any you know wher
| to find me; was invited by Mr.. Bright abou
| two years ago to become member of hi
company; it was before its reorganization;
did not go into the company; was offere,
| stock in it Mr.. Bright said he could get III
4 ~ fnr 2DEn hat tppuld ha nt tba rot IA n
5per cent cannot say of my own knowledg
that knew the reputation of the company il
1877 '7S and TO-
Cross-examned- the interview with Mr.
Bright l did not understand that | was T.
pay anything further for the $4,000 worth o
stock, if would take it, than the $3.50 nj,
understanding was that if | wanted it | wa
to pay $3.50 for this stuff they were getting il
New York. There was man in New lor
who had that amount of stock, and Nh
Bright said he could get it for the price h
named to me. All this was prior to the
reorganization.
j. II. uoFFEcKER, JR,
J. H. Hoffecker, Jr, recalled Have ha
several claims on policies against the Della
ware state Fire and Marine Insurance Com
pany the first one was on a risk i'll Ohio ; til
name of the agent whu placed the policy wa
Lingard it was in the latter part of 1877 thu
| received the claim | went to Delaware Cit
and found that he had gone to Wilmington
| found Myers and had an interview with hi
concerning the ability of the compali
to pay the CLAIM; Myers made
proposition that he would give me SIC
to withdraw the claim. which was IL
Il 500; the reason he gave for making such
proposition was that the company could III
pay it, and that could not get any more it
orought suit refused to accept the so
and declined TO discuss the matter furth'
= with dyers afterwards | saw the directors
the company it was after the removal OF Il
company to Wilmington; Myers. johnson
Bright. Iaitum, and HOLSTER were presen
aud there were two gentlemen from Ne
/ York present, but they took no part in Il
i discussion we talked about ii
/ clam, but nothing was said
8 this interview about the ability of the con
} papy to pay the claim was afterwards settl,
I on compromise OF S5OO the compal
1 appeared to have no attorney and the on
( way could get the claim before.i it was to IL
y for meeting of the directors the next clal
t | had against the company was III 1879
was for 5000 and was held by a building al
e loan association at LutUnia i'll Ohio; 1t "
4 also compromised the amount paid on it
e the company being $3.50; have also HI
/; other claims in the fall of 10 was CALI
upon by III insurance adjuster from Penns!
Q vania who held several policies against IL
d company which had been secured by an age
II named Brown the company at first declln
e to pay them. their defense being that the M
g who placed the policies was a broker and II
y an authorized agent of the company that
J. had not paid over the premium to the col
is pany and therefore it was not responsible
v the number of policies held by the insuraIl
a adiuster was II could not state their aggi
l. gate amount they were compromised upol
e basis of Is per cent; upon one or two not
IL ing at all was paid.
n Redirect-The companies did make'a 81
10 Element on most of the eleven policies secur
n by Brown on compromise of about 10 |
Ie cent On my first claim Myers offered !
d 800 and said could not make anything
a suing the company | told HIM that p
70 ferred to take my own course and that i
le could not find available assets in posSessi
ID of the company | would levy attachmei
W until got my money.
" Cross examined THE defense of the co
l. pany in the case of the eleven policies mt
t. tioned was that Brown was not tn
A. agent the compromise agreed upon "
lie satisfactory to my client; the defer
~ of the company in one OF the vi
\ cases was hat the Delaware State +
ii and Marine Insurance Company had no licei
IL to do insurance business in that State, a
consequently it was not liable for Its Ri
there; in the second Ohio case the defer
was similar to the Pennsylvania one that
ry that the agent who placed the policies '
r NOT legtllar authorized agent of the co
or pany tie compromise in this case, thou
to accepted by my cliont, was not satisfactory
I'd him in another of tho Ohio claims the
We Tense was that there had been an overe
no mate of the value of tho property insul
he and under the clause of the oumphnye ch
d ter applicable to such a case, 1t could not
We responsible for more than two-thirds of
We amount of the risk in the Pennsylva
he cases the INSURANCE adjuster expressed hun.
do as being well pleased with my settlement
| Al,