Morning journal and courier., 1882-11-14
The Insurance Clatms-Argu uments Rela-
 tive to Certain Clafms.

Yesterday afternoon the committee Profs Platt and Clark to consider claims against the insolvent Amer met again to pass upon several hundred claims pre- sented by Charles Hamilton and objeoted to by Re ton demurred to the written objections Before the Baldwin disputed point discussed in his absence at the previous meeting. It to the date the conmttee sere appointed to find out the e1aet date The American Mutual insoIvent at the time it Mutual Life and Trust company, March 21 1873. Es- timanR the value of the insurance building found recently the Bristol S5o 0OO the American National Life and Trust company insolvent also whea they acces'ted these assets and liabilities Mr. commission rs, not in behalf of creditors
 MT. Hamilton agreed that the companies were in- tee could inquire and ascertain if the facts se that the insolvency was even earlier He thought he could in any event. get in all the claims policies the premiums of which were not pad owing to be-
 lief ard that the sb eomRanes nsovent ia ether belief of insolvency.
 Mr. Baldwin did not oppose the claim. Ten minutes argume nt was allowed by the commits sioners on the question of the form of the claims in support of his demurrer to Receiver lis ob- ecttons on these grounds: It does not appear that estate, signed by party interested the claims presented specific claims mentioned the rsceiv- allegation of fact the receiver has interest have claims allowed or disallowed allegations insuf
 reseotation of claims made 1t to file only such informal claims as he had presented The
 
 ! MT. Baldwin replied in opposition to Mr. Hamll- ! tons claim to form.
 He said that the claims were obje ted to because vague on their face claims excluded by Judge Hovey's ruling and not duly authenticated. In the course of his brief remarks he said that \ denee has been presented tending to show that counsel had authority to present claims he ought to be required to explain. Such evidence, under stood had been presented at previous hearing. Mr. Hamilton sharply at acked the dubbing of un- sworn letters evidence, and took Professor Bald severely to task fer advising him to oce practice
 | sI only suggest what in my judgment your course should be to meet the approval of the court the professors reply.
 Mr. Hamilton, in response. said that the proceed ing had descended into attack upon him he did ! not know why. Professor Townsend, in Professor ! Baldwin's office, Mir. Marsden, MT. Beecher and others had presented their claims in the same way | Professor Clark said that he examined the caims mentioned, and in nearly every instance they were \ accompanied by power of attorney in due form MT. Hamilton Eaid tkat the Holdernees letter, if admissible at all, which he stoutIy denied, would merely revoke any revocable authority (f such had ! been given; he remembered of no Holderness claim filed by him in that but could not operate in ! the hundreds of other claims The claims, filed no matter how. must considered until lack of au- thority was clearly shown.
 The additional objections of the receiver wore ordered to be reduced to writing. The hearing waa then adjourned to 2:3o o'clock Monday afternoon, | Nov 27.