The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-03-29
TO SETTLE EQUITABLE FIGHT.
STATE INSURANCE SUPERJNTEN.
DENT TAXES 4 H4ND
Hendricks AdJourns Hearing on the Plan
20 Amend the ChartCr--J'p-state Ns
tornrl Protests IN vain -Crininllns
Committee Appears al Al0an, In Force.

tornGl Protests IN VAIN -CTlnimlns
Committee Appears AT AI1an, In Force
ALBANY March 2s-There l. a prospect
that the troubles q the Equitable Life
Assurance Society will I've settled within
a short time, and that there will I've no need
Of legislation Upon the question.
State Superintendent 81 Insurance Fran.
els Hendricks win go to New York within
a day or two with this object IN view. He
will have talk With representatives Of
the company aud Of the policyholders and
act az sort Of an arbitrator Frank Plat.
counsel for some u the policyholders, who
was in Albany to-day had with him a bill
for introduction in the Legislature aimed
TO meet the Vows Of the discontenled policy
holders lie decided, however, not to have
the bill INTRODUCED until after Supt Hen
bricks passal upon the application Of tho
polcyholders.
The hearing on the proposition 70 change
tho charter of the Society was 70 have
been r,ld lcf5rc state Superintendent Of
Insurance Francis Hendricks to-day The
approval of the Superintendent must be
had before the amendment goes into effect
The hearing attracted a big array Of
counsel e the members Of the Crimmins
policyhodcr,' committee. There were
present Mr. Crimmins John B. Stanchfed.
f. j. Esselstyn Charles Buckley Hubbell
and +. II. OLtcrtridRe. They were accom-
panied 10y Mr. Plat and also Edward Lau-
teTtach as counsel
Elihu Root. with William c. Gulliver
Mr. Hvdts personal counsel represented
the HYDE interests and cx-Judge William y
Cohen and BainhridRe Colby the Alexander
Interests on the board. Thomas Spratt Of
OgdenshUrg and Judge Theodore II Swift
Of PCtsdam represented the protesting
policyholders from 1t. Lawrence county.
The Crmmin' committee opposed the
amendment since under il the policy
holders will not get control Of the direc-
torate fer four wears.
The hearing was postponed for a week
after e private conference Of nearly an
hour between Supt Hendricks and tho
members az tho Crimmhs committee and
It's counsel and the attorneys representing
the company frank II Platt represent
ing those at the conference, made the an
nounccment TO those waiting outside Mr..
Hendricks private Office and expecting
to attend the hearing He said that Supt
Hendricks had directed an adjournment
Of the hearing in order to try 70 bring
about an adjustment =: the differences
between the policyhol5ers and the stock
holders Of the cornolC.
Mr. Spratt protested against the adjourn
ment, saying that he had come from Og-
densburg at considerable expense, expect
ing 10 have an opportunity TO be heard. He
could not be present next Tuesday.
His objections were echoed 10y a con-
siderable number Of those waiting TO be
admitted before the Superintendent and
Mr. Plat said that Mr.. Sp5l.t Suzb' to talk
to Supt. Hendricks. T':lrqupen Mr. Spratt
and about fifty Dersous who had been
waiting for the hearing suTged IN before
the Superintendent, and MIR. Spratt re-
peated his objections to tho proposed adj
louTnment.
Supt Hendricks told the gathering that
the adjournment had been mutually agreed
upon between the counsel for the interests
represented before him.
Mr.. Sprat. was not satisfied. hat hla' pro-
tests were OF no avail.
Mr.. Crimmins said last night that the
adjournment OF the hearing was entirely
Ut the suggestion Of Supt. Hendricks, as
the counsel for both sides we're ready 10 3 ,
ahead. just what sort Of a compromis
the Superintendent hopes to effect Mr..
Crimmins couldn't say. Possibly the direc-
tors might be induced TO have the mutual-
ization plan go into effect within n year
instead of four years Mr. Hendricks
will discuss the situation with both sides
during the week, Mr.. Crimmns said.
On March Is Frank II. Plat sent letter
10 policyholdeTs throughout the State in
viting them to send represen tauves to
the Rearing. He says in the letter that
the directors plan Of naturalization only
serves to perpetuate the Hyde manage
ment. He continues:
The question arises, why did the director =
peTpetuate the Hyde management The
answer cannot be- concealed. The iull board
he fifty Director. eleven only are stock
holders. and, naturally they share ~ the
desire 10 meln'a,n me sVS,eIh Nn aied ns ~
many thousands although only entitled to
annual dividends Of per cent. Inc remain
as directors, not by being actual owners OF
stock, az the charter requires, but because
Mr.. Hyde has transferred into their names
on the society's stock book five shares each,
he still keeping the actual ownership ana
some OF the more powerful and aggressive
Of these directors have been enrChinR them
selves and corporations in which they, are
table or in being interested in such sales
casual comparison Of the Sodetys PUB
hshed security sI WIN tpf s' , Sa baSTd Ia
interested in tho maintenance OF the old
management some OTTER dlLcCIoIS arc sl,a,d la
by the proposed change Of management
Some were not Influenced Ny such considera-
truth, They we're. however. directors only
through the influence and quasi-qualtcstion
OF Mr. Hyde and they we're, Of course,
naturally Influenced.
Those sincere directors who desired genuine
naturalization but who recognlzed thelr
lack Of power 20 bring 10 about we're absent
or voted for the committees plan, in the
belief that anything was better for the bust
ness OF the company than continued CON
test which might lead 20 public Investigation
and exposure The dclusion that prestige
and public confidence could be restored,
With the Hyde management continued.
secured the acquies Cence Of those directors
who desired real mutualiyahon 49,,
we're brought by the thirty-sevcn ohtceIs
against Mr. Hyde remain uninvestiRated
1ho board continued Mr.. hyde IN compete
mower over the trust funds, without the
demand being made 10y a single director
for an explanation or Investigation OF these