The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-07-15

for the reason that he would be Obliged
/ to cancel his agreement with his pres
ent clients and refund to them the SAID
sum of $400 which they had already
paid him: he further stated that II the
/ sum of $1,000 was paid him as a fee II
these cases by the defendant that he
would not bring the suit for his alleged
clients; he further stated that in his be
lief the suit would not be brought II ne
did not bring it The defendant refused
to make such payment, or any other al
said time and soon thereafter the pres
ent suit was begun
IN consideration of the prem ises
this defendant prayS that the said D
r Hite be excluded from all participa-
ton in the conduct Of the above styled
suit and that the court forbid him to
consult or advise with the plaintiff or
the solicitors OF counsel OF the plaintiff
in any way concerning the preparation
or trial or appeal of this suit
The statements made in the motion
to exclude D. R. Hite from the case are
substantiated by affidavits made BY R
T Herrick J. ?. Davis and John T.
Moon. Each of the three aver that the
conditions as set forth in the motion
are true.
r. T. Herrick. who is the general
counsel for the company, has been busy
preparing the legal papers for the an
sWer to the SUIT during the past Two
weeks. In connection and made an ex-
hibft to the motion for the exclusion of
Mr.. Hite from the hearing Of the case IS
attached the report made by him to the
state insurance superintendent It says
in part:
II devoted considerable time to the
records of the company as reciI1ng the
history of its mana cement. The nara
ton is Instructive and excellent From
the organization of the company down
to this time the records disclose the
most anxious regard by the present
management of the best interests of It's
policy and certificate holders No step
of even minor Importance has been
taken without elaboration and due
consideration for all the interests en-
trusted to the care of the officers and
directors No change in plans of the
opportunity was given to the membe
to see the effect and approve the con-
templated action.
7 carefully examined into the ex-
pense items as shown by the books and
the report of AIessrs Good and Fellows.
the expert accountants called in by
you There has never been one cent
diverted from the mortuary or other
sacred trust funds to pay mana cement
or other expenses incident to the pro
curing Of new business.
ssThe practice of the manager ent is
carefully looking ahead and dispensing
upon the surplus in the profit and loss
account for the payment of the ex-
penses necessarily incurred by q life
company in the extension of territory,
cannot be too highly commended The
rates Of the expenses of the Kansas
Mutual Life has been by me compared
from data. at hand with the ratio Of ex-
penSes of similar companies at the
same age, and I find the result highly
favora BILE to the company under con-
sideration-
IN conclusion I wish to say that the
result of the examination, which be-
lieve unusual in its severity. blishes
the fact that the Kansas Mutual Life
is in splendid condition. Inc records
OF the company show patience, industry
and high executive ability upon the
part of the managing officers. and SO
far as it is possible to judge the future
BY the past your examiner is confident
that these gentlemen possess all the
requisites necessary to successfully
conduct the affairs of the company
They are fully aware Of the serious
responsibility resting upon them and
their adm inistration is a guarantee to
the mem bers OF the company that their
contributions viii be guarded by hon
esty and invested with intelligence"
In the answer the defendants set
forth that the change IN the manner Of
conducting the business Of the com
pany was made under the provisions OF
the laws of Kansas. The vote TO change
the company into an old line company
in 1891 was by more than a two-thirds
vote the vote in favor being 3. 0S7 of the
4. 059 members at that time The an
svver alleges that the proxy of the
plaintiff in the case was voted in favor
of the exchange under his fun knoytI-
edge and consent by John f. Ao0n-
The answer admits that the defend
ants to the suit have been in their re-
spective Office since the organization of
the company but deny that there has
ever been q payment Of renewal com
missions estimated on each premium or
that a contract was ever made to pay
either of the defendants a renewal
commission
A denial is made to the allegation
that the defendants had without the
consent of the members of the COM
pany Withdrawn from the assets sal
aries aggregating for the nineteen and
years the sum Of $40 600 and
the payment of $4,000 renewal com
missions
The answer alleges that since the or
ganization Of the company in 1882 and
during the nineteen and one-haIf years !
since the three defendants TO the suit +
have received an aggregate Of S, rs in /
salaries each year
The allega tons IN the bill Of com
plant concerning the Fra ker case were
denied Tt is elaine that no trausac-
ton was made without the knowledge |