The Wisconsin tobacco reporter. (Edgerton, Wis.) 1877-1950, 1900-06-15

A case has been in the circuit court
for more than a year past brought by
Receiver Gilman of the United Farmers
Township Mutual Hail Insurance Co
against Henry Tarrant of La Prairie, to
recover SIP assessment. This was the
Sparta company that went to the wall
after insuring several hundred tobacco
growers in this section of the state leav-
ing crooked record and good many
debts. When assessment was levied
against the farmers insured in the COM
pany, it caused good deal of commo-
| ton, and meetings were held in James
vile, Stoughton and elsewhere, and an
organized effort made to resist the pay
ment. The farmers believed they were
being robbed and employed attorney to
Sight for their rights in court
Mr.. Tarrant was the leader of the
Rock county farmers who refuse to pay
their premiums, and had given the at
torneys for the receiver to understand
that he would carry the case to the Su-
| preme court before he settled. How
ever, Mr.. Tarrant has settled notwith-
| standing, and this fact has caused Mr..
Erdall, attorney for the Receiver, to
write the following letter to the Deer
| field paper, we presume with the idea
that it might influence others to pay up:
The test case brought by Receiver of
| the United Farmers Township Mutual
| Hail Insurance Co. VS.. Henry Tarrant in
| the circuit court for Rock county, was
| disposed of the other day without trial.
The Receiver brought action in that case
| to recover an assessment of SIP. The
| defendant, Mr.. Tarrant, under the ad-
vice of his attorneys, concluded that he
| had better pay the assessment which
| he did, together with the costs which
could be taxed. We were in hopes that
this case might have been tried in the
circuit court and gone to the Supreme
| court so that the law might be estab-
lished in all these cases. In order to
| save expense, we simply commenced this
one suit This conduct on the part of
| Tarrant will make it necessary to bring
another action or actions. | simply men
ton this matter to you because many
of the subscribers of your paper are
interested in this litigation, and will
no doubt be annoyed at the delay in
bringing it to a head. OF course the
disposal of the Tarrant case has no par
ticular bearing upon other cases that we
may bring. 1t indicates, however, to say
the least that there is merit in the posi-
ton of the Receiver, Mr.. Clancy, of
Stoughton, in acting with us in these
To chan Nl,ap II,
several actions in Rock county so as to
insure determination of the questions
of~law involved in one of these actions
at least. Yours truly.
JOHN l.. ERDALL.
AS The Reporter has been informed,
the reason why the Tarrant case was
settled through the advice of his attor-
ney was that Mr.. Tarrant had for years
been an agent for a mutual insurance
company and familiar with all the de-
tails, so was not in condition to put up as
strong a defensive case as was wanted in
making test case to take through the
courts. The plan of the defense, we be-
lieve, is to allow the Receiver to COM
mence suits against other delinquents
when the associations of farmers will put
up good stiff fight.
It will be remembered that the Paiges,
who ran the Sparta company have filed
with the receiver bills aggregating 81 800
for their services at officers of the COM
pany, in addition TO what they had
drawn when in control of affairs. After
the receiver was appointed they went to
La Crosse and started company to in
sure farmers against poor crops. Their
method was, for a certain premium, to
guarantee that the crops of the insured
should net certain sum per acre; and
if they did not, the company would
make up the deficiency, This scheme
seemed too rich for the most gullible
even, and was soon abandoned. After
this failed they are said to have gone to
Nebraska to try new field.