The San Francisco call., 1896-02-13
.BEiTTY'S INSURANCE CASE
The Claim of a Baptist Pastor
as Beneficiary Of a
Debtor.
Three Times the Case Was Tried and
Finally the Plaintiff Was
Nonsuited.

Judges Gilbert, Ross and Hawley OF the
United States Circuit Court of Appeals
listened yesterday to the arguments OF
Attorneys l. B. L. Brandt and J. G. Bates
in an insurance case which has kept life
insurance circles on the qui viYe for some
years. The arguments were made on the
appeal of Rev. George w. Beatty, formerly
Baptist minister of Los Gatos, to recover,
as creditor, $4,000 insurance which E. L.
Smith, stockbroker, took out for Pastor
Beatty's benefit. The company defendant
is the Mutual Reserve Fund Life Associa-
ton of New York.
Mr.. Beatty dealt somewhat in mining
stocks himself, and in the course of busi-
ness he became acquainted with the firm
of Z. l.. Smith d Co. He also became the
firms creditor TO a large amount, but
it finally went into bankruptcy. When
Smith took out his policy it was his par
ticular object to make Mr.. Beatty the
beneficiary, and in that wav it was hoped
the account between them might be
SO uared.
Mr.. Beatty was in the habit of paving
Smith s premiums, and this he managed to
do somewhat irregulariy for about five
years. Five times at least the premi-
ums became overdue, and the custom
OF the company was, by an ar
rangement of business accommodations
to accept the delinquent premiums when
proffered, provided they were accompa-
MED by clear certificates of health.
On May /, 1889, Mr.. Beatty rendered S39
three days after 1t was due to Cashier c.
ID. Park of the Bank of San Jose. the sDe-
cial treasurer of the company there, and
Mr.. Park insisted upon clean certificate
of health being produced as usual. He
allowed Nc. Beatty to leave the $50 on de-
posit pending the production of the certifi-
cate. Mr.. Beatty refused to get the certiti-
cate. however. and several months later he
drew back the money. In course of time
Smith died. Then Mr.. Beatty thought be
had claim against the company, and
after trying to get what he could by com
| promise or otherwise and failing he began
suit.
The case was tried in the United States
| Circuit Court three times. On the first trial
the jury disagreed; on the second the iury
gave the plaintiff verdict for the full
amount asked for, but a new trial was
granted, and on the final trial judge Nc
kenna took the case out of the jury's hands
entirely and nonsuited Mr.. Beatty.
These facts were all brought out yester-
day by Mr.. Brandt, the attorney for the
Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association.
and used to support his contention that
Beatty had forfeited his policy bv his
non n-pavment of premiums. and had no
claim either in law or reason
against his client. He argued that
if the court decided in favor of Beatty if
would demoralize and completely upset
the whole system of INSURANCE; that the
payment of premiums was the vital con-
dition of the contract between Beatty and
! the company, and that when Beatty
failed to perform his part of the agree
| ment the contract was broken and made
void in the very nature of things.
Attorney Bates argued that his client
was entitled to consideration, having naId
number of premiums; but ATTORNEY
Brandt responded by saying the obIira-
ton Of the com mpany hinged entirely upon
beatty s fuihiiment OF his obligation.