The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-10-18

tee, was most exciting throughout the
day. and only the repeated threats Of
Senator Armstrong, chairman of the
committee, to clear the room prevented
violent demonstrations OF disapproba-
zion OF tire witness, who was Richard
A. McCurdy, president of the Mutual
Life Insurance company. AS il was
however there were jeers at several
periods of the days testimony that
temporarily Interrupted the testimony
These came when Mr.. Hughes counsel
Tor the committee, asked questions that
Ar. McCurdy was reluctant To answer
or eVaded, and were made By the crowd
That stood at the back Of the room
which long ago proved inadequate TO
accommodate the counsel and witnesses
aud the crowd of spectators.
Interest is Intense.
Where this investigation is going to
lead or where il is going to end has
caused no small amount of conjecture
and. in some quarters, anxiety. With
the many threats that have been taken
up and dropped before they have been
followed 10 their ends in order that
some new lead may be taken up, and
with the additional features that are
disclosed almost every day the interest
GROWS more intense.
IN McCurdy's testimony today a fea-
ture entirely new was disclosed, and
this was that the Mutual employed a
literary bureau to send out to the press
OF the country news matter that was
of benefit TO the company. This infor-
lnatiOn was ELECTED during the probing
or the legal expense account. 1t came
out when voucher for the payment OF
$500 10 Joseph Howard. jr.. in 1904 was
produced, Another voucher for the
same amount paid in May. 1905. was
marked 'repayable on demand" and
for professional services"
Correspondent Graft.
Mr.. McCurdy had vised the vouchers
and explained that Mr.. Howard was d
newspaper correspondent. and that his
services consisted in syndicating news
stories.
Pressed further Mr. McCurdy said
MI. Howard was a correspondent for
The Boston Globe and several other
papers
Mr.. MoCuFdy said he paid AIr. How
ard about s., 500 a year, and that the
voucher for May 1909, was really a
loan or an advance"
During the earlier session of the day
an ATTEMPT was made TO obtain from
Mr.. McCurdy the reason for reducing
the dividends on policies as the bust
ness increased and the assets piled up.
This question was prompted by the
large number of letters received from
policy-hOlders by the committee.
Dividend Whitfield Down.
These letters came from all over the
country, Mr.. Hughes said. but he read
a number from the policy holders who
reside in this city. One in particular
Tor $4,000. that in 1876 drew a dividend
of S55.16, had been gradually cut until
IN 1904 1t received only So.
To all questions on this matter the
4 Witness was not fortified with the in
formation sought; that these were not
essential matters. and when pressed
replied that he refused TO discuss the
question He would prOffeT a witness,
his actuary, whose business il was 10
Know these things. but as for himself
he would not discuss the question.
Defiant Demeanor.
Mr.. McCurdy's demeanor was SO de-
faint that the spectators bent forward
10 catch every word, and stood on tip
toe. expecting every moment to hear
him directed by counsel TO answer the
question. His prOffer of another Wit
ness was ali that prevented steps be-
ing taken toward his indictment When
Mr.. McCurdy would not offer the infor-
nation himself, Mr.. Hughes started on
another iiae of inquiry. Later in the
day Chairman Armstrong explained
that since the Information desired by
the committee could be obtained by
another course. it was agreeable to the
committee to let Mr.. McCurdy place
himself in the position he did. Had he.
however. been directed to answer. and
knowing the Information desired and
then refused, Mr.. Armstrong said, steps
would have been taken to indict him
for misdemeaHOr. which is the Of
Tense of a witness refusing 10 answer
questions before d legislative commit
tee while the legislature is not i'm ses-
sion. II the iegislatuSs We're in SEES
sion refusal 10 answer would have con-
stituted contempt.
Protest of Witness.
Mr. McCurdy also during the effort
10 induce him 10 answer the questions
as to the reduction of dividends.
launched forth into a protest as to the
manner in which the investigation Nas
being conducted, He said the commit
tee was going beyond the scope intend
ed when IL was appointed by the legis-
latuTe. and that the Investigation had
assumed the proportions of an inquisi-
tion. He was asked by Senator Arm
strong how he would conduct the in
vestigation, and was told if he had any
better method the committee would be
glad 10 know of il. Mr. McCurdy
thought that being a witness under
oath made him feel he was on the rack.
lie said his answers were published in
p distorted form, that appeared like
an attempt to ruin him.
After taking up the questions of the
reduction of dividends. Mr. Hughes
read long list Of policy numbers that
had been paid and the dividends re-
ceived by the pollcy-holders. Asked
what he had 10 say 10 these, 1Ir. Ne
Curdy said
Figures don't lie, but liars can fig
ure."
Little Legal items.
He hastily explained that he meant
that facetiOusly and that he would be
very glad TO verify the figures.
The legal expenses were again re-
CURED 10 and a number of vouchers
were read, 1t was brought out that
William Barnes. ST.. Of Albany had ap.
peared before committees in Albany
last winter and had received ST 600 from
the New York Life and the same
amount from the Mutual. Later it was
brought out IN letter 10 Mr.. McCurdy
from William Barnes. jr., that c. A
Barnes, sr., was under an annual re-
fainer TO the Mutual Life a voucher
in 1902 for $4,000, payable to T. II.
BOwies, was explained by Mr.. McCurdy
as part payment in settlement of a suit
Mr.. Bowles had brought against the