The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-10-18
.McCURDY FRETS
 AND FUMES

| to give an accounting couid pc uIoueAt | without the consent of the Attorney General?" asked Mir. Hughes At first MT. McCurdy said he did not remember such a bill. but finally said ne did remember that there was such
 bill brought in by State Senator Brack- cit.
 What attitude did you take in the
 matterT
 None that I am aware of" Did you not pay William Barnes. sr. of Albany, a bill 1ately?" NO. Yes. now I remember he said he I had apeared before a Committee and argued some question before 1t. He sent in his bill and-I paid it." replied Mr. ] McCurdy.
 Mir. Hughes produced a voucher and correspondence. This showed that on September II, 1905, $1,0o0 was paid Barnes for three arguments and certain documents drawn up for the insurance company at Albany. The correspond ence explains that the late Edward l.. Short had arranged to pay MT. Barnes for opposing the Bracket bill. the New York Life paying him a like amount. The letter stated that Mir. Barnes had received $1,000 from Judge Hamilton on behalf of the New York Life In- surance company and the bill to the Mutual was for the same amount. The bill was paid.
 'In what sense was it to the interest of the policyholders to oppose the re- peal of this section?' asked MT. Hughes.
 T don't suppose I paid the least at- tention to what the services were l received a note from the acting head of the legal department and so authorized the payment" r'Is there any possibility if the mat ters are thus left to the law depart nient of bills in the interest of the poli- cyholders being opposed?" ri they were I should get another general solicitor"
 ..wilI you give your own opinion of this proposed repeal?"
 T will abandon my usual habit of novel reading tonight and will give my best attention to this matter. I do not like to answer offhand."
 s0O1,701 for a Years Printing. The printing and stationery account Of ss01,101 for 1904 was taken up and MT McCurdy said that on several occa-
 sions he had secured reduction of bills for stationery.
 Lysander W. Lawrence. the witness
 said, was the head of the firm of l.. w. Lawrence and Company The Mutual Life Insurance Company had been buy
 ing stationery from that firm for 35 ycdis WAbhCS SdAu tHdt tuG
 firm and the Globe Printing Company received the bulk of the Mutuars bus mess in stationery. Witness did not know that Lawrence was treasurer and Louis W. Ballard, a partner in the Law renee firm. was secretary of the Globe Printing Company. Of the $601.101 paid for stationery last year witness could not say how much the Lawrence firm and the Globe Printing Company got. xNffnasz haf nfR af ho tual Life Insurance Company is inter- ested in either the Lawrence firm or the Globe Printing Company. Mir McCur- dy said he did not know If any expen- ditures for any other purposes than stationery were included in that &C., count.
 MT. Hughes said that a question had been raised concerning the money paid by the Mutual Life Insurance Company for luncheons for its clerks Yes" said MT. McCurdy, "the clerks were fed, but the scrubwomen, elevator and policemen are not fed by the com pany. About 500 clerks are fed daily at cost of 40 cents head.
 "1s there stock of wines kept in the building?" asked MT. Hughes. T don't believe that"
 Mir. Beck, cour sel for the Mutual Life Insurance Company, interrupted the ex- f animation to state that when the
 French delegation to the St. Louis Exposition was entertained by the Mu- ! tual Life. wine was served. voucher for payment of s1O,oOO un- der date of May 22, 1902. for a first pay- inert on a contract on that date to Marsh Bowles was brought up. Wit ness said Rowles was an agent at one time. The money was in part settle ment of a suit Bowles brought against the company for claims after his re- moVal in Milwaukee. Bowles organized campaign of policyholders against the company and the company settled the suit for S30.000.
 Witness said Bowles was removed TOT fnsubordination, which consisted or opposing the changing of his gen.
 eral agency to a salaried agency and
 transferring his agency business to the books of the company"
 boWIes had addressed a letter to the trustees denouncing the President. Mr
 MeCurdy, but could not say whether he had copy of that letter. MT
 Hughes handed to the witness a vol
 uminous package and asked If he rec ognized 1t as copy of Mir Bowles's communication. which he did The
 Bowles letter. extracts from which were read, charged extravagance in the management of the company; neg lect of all sound principles in inviting
 posAheSS, that IL was consumed Dy the ambition to write new business wrote fictitious business and employed in- competent men because they were rela- tions of high officials.
 Did Not Reed the Letter.
 The trustees referred the matter to the President with power" witness testified He added that the board had not read the letter. Witness read only
 sufficient of 1t to see what 1t was and then removed Bowles. He testified that MT. Bowles had been successful agent in the South and West and he was removed for throwing mud" To the charge in the Bowles letter that President McCurdy provided fat of- fees for his family, witness replied in a lengthy statement as to how his son. Robert H. McCurdy, became the gem eral manager. Witness detailed the education his son had received to adapt him to take up the foreign business, and said above all he was loyal to the company. T know of no other mans son in this city or elsewhere" he con- tinued who could have filled that position as the man appointed to it." Witness assumed all the Bowles charges were a lie," and especially the charge that a great deal of the com pany's business had been given away.
 Witnesss memory could not be re- freshed as to any policyholders' move ment, and Mir Hughes asked abruptly:
 Well, why did you settle his suit?"
 Well" replied the witness, mot to be disrespectful to the committee, think a farmer Is justified in buying rifle to shoot a skunk without shooting it at close quarters"
 You thought in either case there