The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-10-18
PRESIDENT McCURDY
REFUSES TO ANSWER
Continued From Pane

Continued From Page I.
You are its president and receive
Sl5O'coO salary ] want to learn for
what you're responsible.
You are trying to prove me a fool. ="
the witness retorted.
Comment Unnecessary.
Without commenting upon that
which obviously requires no COM
ment, let me ask you 10 tell us 10 the
best of your ability some of the lines
on which your company is conducted. %
said Mr.. Hughes.
Mr.. McCurdy insisted that his ac-
tuary must answer the questions on
dividends paid and how they are cal
culated. He declined to enter any eX-
PLANTATION further than that the policy
holders above referred TO had a re-
duced rate policy.
Mr. McCurdy said if a copy of the
policy holders letter was furnished
him he would have the matter looked
up.
Mr.. Hughes said the reason he took
up this subject with Mr.. McCurdy In
stead of the actuary was that Mr.. Nc
Curdy had submitted a great many fig
ures TO show the increase in the salary
of the witness was due to the great
prosperity of the company. Mr.. Nc
Curdy many times declined TO answer"
questions by Mr.. Hughes.
Declined TO Answer
Il don't want your discussion" said
Mr.. Hughes. IF you say you don't
know, We'll not expect an answer"
i decline to discuss the question,
witness said.
DO you know?"
Il decline to discuss the question"
DO you refuse to answer the ques
tion?"
II decline to discuss the question. I
have proffered you a witness whose
business 1t is to know all Of these facts
you are looking for"
Other letters from policy holders
We're read to Mr.. McCurdy showing a
gradual reduction of dividends, and he
replied that probably the decrease was
due to the approach of the maturity of
the policy. Questioned further TO eX-
plain what he meant. he again refused
to discuss the question"
More Dodgng.
Chairman Armstrong then asked the
witness what relation the approach of
the maturity of the policy had to do
with its earning capacity. and witness
refused to "be drawn into a discus
sion"
Chairman Armstrong then said he
did not think Mr.. McCurdy compre-
hended the scope of the committee. and
that if the committee desired his judg-
ment of the insurance business the wit
ness should be glad to give 1t.
Mr.. McCurdy again preferred his ac-
tuary to furnish the information de-
sired. He protested so strongly against
the manner in which the investigation
was being conducted that Chairman
Armstrong asked how he would con-
duct it,
II don't know. don't impugn the
motives of this committee, of which
you are the worthy chairman"
Sarcasm of the Chairman.
eff there is a better way of conduct
ing this investigation. Mr.. McCurdy."
said Chairman Armstrong, I'VE would
be most happy to learn it"
Senator fully asked the witness If he
thought the committee was too thor, 'gh
in the investigation and the witness re-
piled that he did not.
Mr.. McCurdy said he thought that put
ting a witness under oath and making
him feel that he is on the rack is apt TO
produce incorrect answers. His answers.
manner thot looked like an attempt 10
ruin him.
why shouldn't a witness shut his
mouth up?" he continued. when a wit
ness comes here and tells frankly all that
he knows, the committee should consider
such testimony in executive session, TO
see what further stems should he taken,
but 70 attempt TO drag from witness
anything further than he knows makes
him look well like 4 criminal"
Recurring TO the question of reduction
OF dividends, witness again declined 10
give direct answer.
Liars and Figures.
Figures don't lie, but liars can figure"
was Mr.. McCurdy's reply after Mr..
Hughes had read q long list of policy
numbers. with the amount they were
taken out for the amount paid in ard the
dividends received by the policy holders.
Mr.. McCurdy continued:
You have a right 20 get your case IN
in your own way, Mr.. Hughes, | have not
followed the figuFeS There are too many
that ali those statements aud figures can
De explained by the proper persons. | do
not attribute any lie TO anybody. l say
il facetOusfy. -
Well let's see what YOU do 10 reduce
expenses of YOUR company. Do you re-
duce salariesa" said Mr.. Hughes.
Well er-here there was great laugh
You are entitled to that laugh" he
said.
Let me see. how can answer that"
Salary Question.
Mr.. Hughes then brought out that sala-
ries had been slightly reduced In the re-
forms Of clerical force and general agen-
cies.
Il have not reduced the salaries of the
executive officers, they were never cut.
They were none too fat anyway, said Mr..
McCurdy.
Mr.. McCurdy said he would furnish fig
ures 10 show how much the expenses had
been reduced b. the reforms. lie said
he had tried TO reduce expenses OF the
legal department. Mr.. Hughes said that
the le~al expenses for last year were
greater than heretofore. Mr.. McCurdy de-
MED any esDOnsibility for any statements
made by other witnesses. He said he had
ordered discontinued many suits and dis
missed a number OF attorneys.
Complaint of a Lawyer.
Nj. Hughes read a complaint made by
prominent lawyer. well known to Presi-
dent McCurdy. The lawyer IN long let
ter described the falling off In the divi-
dends of his own and twenty-five other
policies. The figures given in the lawyer
letter indicated that the dividends began
decreasing in 1886, going down In his
case from Si6 in that year TO 81 20 in 1864.
Mr.. Hughes stated that before 1880 the
theory or a high surplus was not put In
operation and up TO that date policy hold
ers were paid reasonable dividends, but
under the surplus theory dividends de-
creased.
'Haye you any comment 10 make upon
the lawyers letter. asked Mr.. Hughes.
Il have no doubt the statements made