The Washington times., 1905-11-27
Says They Are Only
Ordinary Trade
Discounts.
GOT BUT ONE HIMSELF
Accepted Small Return to
Help Agent in
Contest.

committee of the Legislature inveSti-
eating life insurance convened this
morning Air. Hughes called George w.
Perkins to the stand.
The witness followed his usual Gus
tom of standing up while testifying.
Mr. Hughes questioned Mr.. Perkins
first in regard TO the policies held by
him in the New York Life especially to
fHd out II he had secured rebates on
his own policies.
One Trifing Rebate.
Mr.. Perkins denied that he had ever
received p rebate. except IN one In
stance. wbere i1e took out q policy as a
reward to sn agent who was striving for
a reward
Iu reply TO the question as 20 the
amount of his policies. Mr. Perkins re-
piled that he believed he was the larg-
est individual holder of policies in the
company and that he had twenty-four
policies aggregating $31o.000. He began
at the age of twenty-One TO take out q
policy every year.
While saying that he had received no
rebates himself, except in the instance
quoted. Mr.. Perkins defended the sss-
TEN of officers receiving rebates, saying
they were nothing more than ordinary
trade discounts recognized in all busi-
ness enterprises.
Good Business.
Mr.. Hughes questioned him as 70 what
right an officer Of n company had TO
rebate while poiieyholders received no
such rebates. but Mr.. Perkins cluns 70
MS point that such business methods
were permissible.
Mr. Perkins said Second Vice PFesi-
dent TaFbeu Of the Equitable. through
an arrangement made with the witness.
secured a commission OF Z per cent on
his policies ia the New York Life.
He said Mr.. Tarbells policies for $50 coo
had been taken originally through a gen
eraI agency. When this agency was dis
continued the commissions were paid by
the comptroller.
As to Tarben.
Mr.. Perkins said he knew Tarbell re-
ceived his cossissions. but denied he had
made the arrangement. he learned of
The matter because Mr.. Tarbel told him.
This conversation. ne said. took place
about the time Mr.. Tarbell took our the
policies.
The custom has been. he said. to allow
rebates 10 officers of other insurance
companies. He said he did not favor
rebating, but this custom has been gen
orally followed
Ignorant of Law.
He said he did not know this was a
violation Of the insurance laws. but ad-
mitted he knew OF no amendment Of the
laws permitting rebates TO officers of
ether companie
Turning from the subject Of rebates,
Mr.. Hughes then questioned Mr.. Per
zins in regard to syndicate operations
Of the New York Life. The steel cor
poration's syndicate was first touch
AR. Perkins said the New York Life
had no direct participation in the syn
dicate. The New York Security Trust
Company lie said. took $5,0oo000 - sill1 ssifll1
syndicate
On Steel Deal.
An arrangement was made whereby
the Security Trust Company agreed Ia
give the New York Life the profits on
fe.s20.000 Of the participation, while
being guaranteed against loss Of la
bility on account OF the deal.
There was a lively tilt between Mr.
Perkins and Mr.. Hughes because Mr..
Perkins tried 10 read a statement X
had prepared dealing with this sub
5ect while Air Hughes insisted the wit
ness should be dealt with by ques-
tions and answers.
Mr. Perkins complained that he was
not being given "A chance TO make full
statement in a matter for which he has
been severely criticised.
An agreement on the part Of he New
York officers not 10 participate in stock
transactions kept them from taxing parr
I'm the DartlciDation. There Is no record
OF this transaction IN the books Of the
company. he said.
As the chance of profits seemed great.
the deal was made through the Security
Trust Company. IN which il was q large
stockholder Mr.. Perkins said he was
able 10 make the Security Trust Cs7zi-
pany the registrar Of a large amount OF
preferred stock or the Steel corporation.
This was the consideration which led
TO the guarantee against loss in the
trausa ction.