Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1903-09-17
COMPLAIN OF FEES.
Insurance Companies Charges Against
Beehler and Merriam.

BeehIer and Merriam.
Des Moines, Sept. 1.-THE inves-
tigation which the state executive
council directed Auditor OF State Car
roll to make into the question of fees
collected from insurance companies
by the insurance examiners of Iowa
working under former auditors, has
been completed, practically, and the
facts as ascertained have been made
a matter of record in the Office of Mr..
Carroll.
The information was ELECTED from
insurance companies, Auditor Of State
Merriam having failed to make up the
record on direction of the executive
council. The replies of the companies
now in the hands of Auditor Carroll
show that during 1899, 1900, 1901 and
1902, there was collected from insur-
ance companies In Iowa and other
states, fees amounting to approximate
ly $22,5 500 for examinations and ex-
penses. The money was paid by the
companies to Mr.. Max Beehler, of
trips made by him the then auditor,
Mr.. Merriam, accompanied and as
sisted him in examining about twenty
two companies, charges being made
for his expenses, and about Sc, 500 be-
ing collected. Some of the smaller
Iowa companies were examined by z.
L. Camp. Mr.. Beehler appeared to
have been assisted in certain examina-
fNnc hui f, iya H.ya nsI
Bluffs man, and in another by Mr..
Upper, of Los Angeles.
Many Of the companies which re-
ported to the present auditor COM
planned bitterly of the charges made
for the so-called examinations, and of
the extravagant expenses. To deter
mine the extent Of the examinations,
the companies were requested to state
the time occupied by the Iowa officers
in making them. Not to exceed seven
or eight days appears to have been
put upon the books of any single COM
pany, and in such cases the charges
went as high as several hundreds of
dollars. 1t is the theory of the officers
and insurance men that adequate ex-
aminations cannot be made by single
experts in a few days. OF the larger
companies adequate examinations
would take weeks. In one case a COM
pany reports that it only saw the card
of the examiner, and he collected $4S
for leaving it.
The reports of the companies, for in
stance, show that from May IA to
June IA, 1902, Messrs. Beehler and
Merriam together examined six east
ern companies and collected fees
amounting to $2,524.20 for it.
From November 10, 1902, to Deem
Der II, of the same date, fifteen other
eastern companies were examined by
them, and fees amounting to $4,003.45
were collected therefor.
In the last week in March, 1902, Mr..
Beehler examined two California con.
Germs, and charged them $1,700.
Before the executive council had
gone far into this investigation it dis
covered that the state was powerless
to do anything on account of the fee
collections of the auditor and his in!
surance examiners.
An inquiry was made Of the attor.
ney general as to the power of the
council to require the auditor to &C.
count for the fees. General Mullan
went into the law very carefully and
decided that there was no statutory
authority for requiring the auditor to
account for the collections. Therefore,
the state cannot recover the fees.
But the council asked the attorney
general If the auditor of state was not
required by the law to keep a record
of the fees collected and this the at
torney general said was required by
law Auditor Carroll is now engaged
in inscribing upon this record book
the reports made as to the Merriam
Beehler collections and will keep his
own examination accounts therein, If
any are made.
The council, has gone into the mat
ter of recovery of fees paid but has as
yet been unable to discover any
method by which this may be done.
AS to the power of the companies to
recover fees voluntarily paid by them,
there is doubt 1t is said that the
Iowa law might be sufficient if there
was extortion, to permit indictment
and prosecution for oppression in
office. But this prosecution must be
at the place where committed so that
if there were plain guilt in this mat
ter, even, possibly the New York or
Minnesota or California or other state
laws would not cover the matter as do