The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-10-05

| the life insurance companies Of this State, when the sessions of the conn mittee were resumed today. For the first time since the investiga- tion began. James McKeen, associated with MT. Hughes as counsel of the committee conducted the examination. MT. McKeen, who has been studying the technical end of life insurance, opened by outlining to Mir. Mccall the power and scope of the committee and said It's report to the Legislature will in no way be limited by the testimony taken at these sessions.
 MT. Mccall in answer to questions by MT. McKeen, then described in detail the system used fin making reports to State insurance departments and also explained the mrotality tables followed by the New York Life Insurance Com pany.
 Mir. Mccall was questioned as to surrender values under the Massachu- setts law and also as to non forfeiture laws. He said the first non-forfefture law was known as the law of 1881 and was the result of a general demand that a policyholder should be remuner- ated for premiums paid if the policy was surrendered before its expiration.
 MT. Mccall said a company's surplus is earned by a lesser mortality than that assumed to be probable and as by securing a rate of interest on money and investments better than that counted upon In the actuary tables Asked as to the difference between Government supervision in England and State supervision in New York. MT. Mccall said there was practically no Government supervision in England The only thing of this nature was, he said. the filing of a statement by life insurance companies with the Board of Trade.
 Mir Mccall then went into a history of life insurance in this State. telling of the greater number of companies started from 1875 to 1880 and of the failure of most of them. through ex- travagance and incompetence. Mir Mo Call said that increasing compensation to agents was a temptation for agents to rebate, but Mir. Mccall said under the New York license" system the agents contracted not to do 50 and forfeited benefits. of that system if they violated their agreements. He then went into a detailed statement of gen- eral legislation, saying:
 Legislators Are Blackmailers.
 With the begining of every year, I dare say. 1t Is the feeling of every ex- ecuttve offlcer-I know 1t Is of myself that for the ensuing five or six months of the year we shall be badgered and harrassed to death in every State in the Union by the introduction of bad pills Of every kind. Sometimes men of honor will feel they have a right to amend law and their motives are ali right. but mainly the general insurance legislation of this country emanates from people who are desirous of strik- ing at insurance companies. believe that three-fourths of the insurance bills introduced in the United States are blackmailing bills. The manage ment of these companies really trembIe m the beginning of the year as to what they have to encounter during the first six months of the year."
 It is a condition which I think vour committee could do much to provide against If it would pass a law similar to the Massachusetts law, which has been very effective. I think, that every bill introduced shall be lodged or rs- ported to the Secretary of State.
 MT. Mccall said that inc Ne,v svorsr law of 1899 did not wholly prevent re- batting. but It had done much good. ana that the New York Life Insurance Company had done as much as possible 10 make the law effective. He had dis charged many agents for relating.
 In explaining the tontine and de- ferred dividend plans of insurance, MT. Mccall said:
 HoAy iuitu OI the New YOrk Life insurance Company has a class There Is no fund which may be expended on motives of its officers There Is no re- serve or surplus that does not come under the provisions of the laws of New York"
 MT. Mccall was asked if he agreed with Elias Wright, sponsor for the Massachusetts Forfeiture law of 1861. that a life insurance company's re- serve should be absolute property of the policyholders. The witness replied that he did not; he thought Mir. own view, Mir. Mccall said. was that a charge against the reserve on surrendered policy was legitimate The policyholder who surrenders a policy breaks contract, said Mir. Mccall, and 1t was only just that charge be made the company would have in writing a new policy.
 In reply to a question, Mir. Mccall said that the New York Life Insurance Company did not make a deduction in favor of German subjects in order to keep its hold on German business.
 Spanish Soldiers Not Favored.
 Lawyer McKean said to him: "It has been alleged that there was a dis crimination in favor of Spanish sol diers against American soldiers during the late war"
 
 the New York Life did not issue a policy to single Spanish soldier dur ing the war"
 MT. Mccall said the New York Life Insurance Company began to make loans to its policyholders in 1892.
 You know 1t Is against the law for companies to make loans against their own policies?' ask Mr. McKeen.
 T never heard that before" said MT. Mccall.
 Senator Fully asked how general the practice Is among the companies.
 Mir. Mccall said: I've have been forced into 1t lately and there is really no difference between loans on poli- cies and surrender of values except that in the latter case the policy does not continue in force"
 Rufus Welles Weeks, actuary and second vice president of the New York Life Insurance Company. succeeded Mir. Mccall as a witness After explain ing much in detail of tables and tech nical management, MT. McKeen brought out that the company paid agents more for deferred dividend pol cording to the witness than they paid for writing the annual dividend policy After much questioning by Senator witness said this was be- cause the deferred dividend policy was more to be desired by the company, as 1t furnished fund to carry on new business. MT. McKeen asked him | about the declaration made by the | New York Life Insurance Company in | It's returns to the Prussian govern | nent, which showed the dividend on | nation of greatly increased payments | In fba final wear of the tOnffna