New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-12-12
"SUIT NOT FOR N. Y. LIFE"
Scott Says Hamilton Vas Paid by
Prouident SaUings.

The legislative insurance investigating COM
mittee hit another yellow dog trail mingled
with that of Judge" Andrew Hamilton just
before it adjourned yesterday. Following this
trail Mr.. Hughes revealed remarkable appar-
ent lack of harmony between the testimony of
John A. Mccall president of the New-York
Life, and Edward F. Scott. president of the
Provident Savings Life Assurance Society
which will result in the recall of President Nc
Call and may shed a new light on the nOto-
rious Hamilton transactions. So surprised was
Mr.. Hughes at the extent of the discovery he
had made that he requested the committee to
postpone its adjournment and for twenty min
utes fairly revelled in disclosures.
These disclosures affected the payments 10
Judge" Hamilton in a case before the Court
of Appeals in 1904 for which he received s134.-
600. Mr.. Mccall had testified in October that
this case affected the constitutionaIity of a
tax Law passed by the legislature in 1902
Judge" Hamilton had undertaken the case. ac-
cording to his testimony. and the company had
agreed to give him one-third of the taxes, paid
under the law if he should recover the whole
amount by establishing the unconsttutionality
of the law. He explained that the New York
Life anxious not to appear in the case. 50
the Provident Savings was made, by agree
ment, to bring a test case. This case was
won and as a result the New York Life re-
covered over 100000 and Judge" Hamilton re-
ceived as his share $4,000. of which $4,000
was paid to him directly by arrangement with
the State Controller and the remaining $4,000
stood as a part Offset to the S23500O yellow
dog" fund then disclosed Although skepticaI
about the wisdom Of this performance, at the
time Mr.. Mccall explained it, Mr.. Hughes
passed it by
Yesterday. however. when President Scott Of
the Provident Savings Life was on the stand Mr.
Hughes recalled the incident and carefully
scanned the legal expenses of this company for
some reference to it. He found it. To his sur
prise. Mr. Scott testified first of all. that there
never had been any agreement that the Provi-
dent Savings Life should fight a test case; sec
ondIy that. although the company had employed
Judge" Hamilton, it had employed him it's
own counsel and paid him fee as SUCH and
finally that the company had acted absolutely
independently. never had any agreement with
President Mccall any one else. and had sup
posed that Mr. Hamilton acting for 1t ex-
clusiveIy.
OF course the apparent meaning of this
evident to the committee at once. 1t seemed to
Indicate that Judge" Hamilton. appearing
counsel for a minor company and winning
suit for which he got $4,000. received $4,000
of the money belonging to the poicyholders OF
the New-Yorx Life for the same case More
over. it was also shown that Judge F. f. Mccall.
President John A McCalIs brother and Judge
Hamilton's predecessor as counsel of the New
York Life. had received $1,000 for preliminary
work in this case. He went on the bench and
abandoned the case before it came 10 trial. thus
losing the returns which ultimately came to
Hamilton On the point of any agreement be-
tween the officers of the two companies Mr..
Hughes made the most searching examination.
but AIr Scott stuck TO his original statement
and insisted that he had always supposed Mr..
Hamilton represented them in an ordinary leSal
manner, and them alone.
When he was on the stand in october Presi-
dent Mccall testified to this affair in some de-
tail His explanation Of the arrangement with
Mr.. Hamilton was as follows.
I'VE .-ade an agreement with him that ne
sbouId take hold of the case. The New-York
Life did not agree to act as the party in the
suit. and so the Provident Savings. in this city
was made the complaining party.
This did not satisfy Mr.. Hughes Who seemed
astonisr,ed at the amount of the sum paid Mr.
Hamilton and inquired as to why the regular
counsel OF the New-York Life was not placed
in charge of the case. thus eliminating any ne
cessity for giving away one third of the re-
covery Mr.. Mccall explained that the New
York Life did not wish TO appear in the case.
This did not satisfy Mr.. Hughes either. and he
pressed the point concerning the contingent