Evening star., 1897-04-09
A S K A RE EIV r
Case Against the National Life Maturity In
suranoe Company.
What IL Charged in the Bill Filed by
Certificate HOlders-The Alleged
ShrinkaEe Of Assets.

Edwin B. Renhold and seventeen other
residents of Marietta, Pa, certificate hold
ers In the National Life Maturity Insur-
ance Company, today filed here a bill in
equity agair st the company, praying that
receiver or receivers be appointed by
the court to take possession of the COM
pany's assets, hold the same subject to the
courts direction. ard that the assets be
applied to the payment Of the company s
creditors. Also. that the investment fund
assets Of the company be ascertained AMI
distinguished from other assets, and ap-
piled to the payment of outstanding in
vestment deposit certificates. and that the
company's business and affairs be closed
up and settled under the direction of the
court.
The conplainants refer to the recent ap-
pointment by the court Of Mr. Job Bar
nard as receiver of the company, upon the
petition of Mr.. Frank Hume, one of the
concerns stockholders and directors. who
alleged that the company was insolven,;
mat the assets were about 100000. Its liza
nil1ties to insurance holders on death
claims Sl04GlU, and that 1t would require
$2S9,OOo In addition to satisfy certificate
holders. 1t Is asserted by the complain
ants that June 80, 1885, the company re-
ported that the assets of the investment
department OF the company amounted to
$533. $50, of which amount 1905 6s6 90 was
reported to be secured by first mortgage
securities, $15?.O10.97 by loans on invest
nient deposit certificates and other secur-
ities. $49. .2Oo.93 in stocks and bonds, with
other assets making the stated total They
say that the company then stated in a
published report that the sum of 500 600
was on deposit with the Washington Loan
and Trust Company.
Ihe complainants further allege thai
when one of them inquired, July IL, 1896.
as to the company's condition ,ppy Of
tne ABOVE statement was inclosed to him in
reply: that October o. 1885, R. G. Dun &
co. were SO informed by the company. and
that within the last four months an agent
OF the complainants. calling at the defend
ant companys Washington office was in
formed that the company was in a healthy
condition
AS to the causes for the apparent great
Snrlnkage of the company's assets from
s5S3 426 80. as published by 1t in July, 1895, to
Sl06,Uo. as admitted by the company in
answering Mr.. Hume's petition last month.
the compainants say they are wholly
without information, and they saw they
DO not believe such shrinkage has occur
red But. they charge, If there has been
such a shrinkage, it has been caused by
some wrongful diversion of the assets
from the company by its officers. The
sald assets, they are advised, ought to be
reclaimed and restored to the company. or
a receiver for 1t. for the benefit of its
creditors They say, too, ti.at Mr.. Hume
is not a certificate holder or creditor and
ought not to be considered in the closing
up of the companys affairs
They desire a full discovery made Of ALL
assets. and as to the terms, conditions and
requirements of the contract made with the
National Life Insurance Company of Hart
FORD. Conn.,. whereby all risks in force were
transferred to the Hartford company.
Inc complafnantS are represented by At
torneys Henry F. Woodard and Birney &
Peter.