The daily morning journal and courier., 1905-01-02
EX-GOVERNOR BULKELEr
Decline. to Reply to pr. smyth'. Open
 Letter.

HE Letter.
 Hartford Dec. 31.-Ex- Governor Nor Igan G. Bulkeley to-day. in conversation with representative of the Evening Post declined to make any reply to the
 latest attack of Rev. pr. Newman smyth, of New Haven, on himself and
 dr. Fessenden, which appears in the form of an open letter to the senators and representatives-elect.
 While declining to discuss this phase Tor the senatorial question, ex- Governor Bulkeley spoke freely on other features of it, saying that he believed the people settled the question of the succession to the senatorship by, their votes last Tall, as it was a question of issue as well as any other. As to the ultimate result of the outcome of that election, he said he was perfectly satisfied with the outlook.
 The inference is that the ex-governor expects to be successful in the fight which he Is now making for the prize, which is now almost in sight.
 As regards the attack of the New Ha- ven minister on him and the Aetna In- surance company, he dismissed the fea- lures of the subject without comment
 The letter sent out by Dr. Smyth is as follows:
 To the Members of the Legislature:
 Dear Sirs-Ex-Governor Bulkeley has presented himself as candidate for election to the senate of the United States. Allow me to offer for your consideration two valid reasons why your honorable body should grant him leave to withdraw. Tn so doing am not to be understood as fayoring the candidacy of the other prominent can l didate, Mir. Fessenden. My objections to MT. Bulkeley rest upon public docu- ments and records of the courts. This appeal to your Judgment should be un- derstood also as in favor of any other candidate whom you may agree upon as worthy to represent in the United States senate the people of an honest state. I write also in honorable con- tempt of the impudent claim that a leg- lislature of this state can be bound by any pledges beforehand to do anything which when 1t meets, it may judge to be unworthy of it.
 The first insurmountable objection to the elevation of MT. EalkeIey to this high office Is based upon the records of the case of Betts, insurance commits sioner, vs. the Aetna Life Insurance company. The page references which I
 add below are the reports of the insur- ance commissioner as indicated. The I main points may be summarized as fol- lows:
 1. From the year 1879 up to the pres ent time MT. Bulkeley has been the president of the company, and as such
 may be held responsible for it's policy.
 2. This company is of the nature of a semi-public trust, and therefore any
 allegation of wrong in its policy is di-
 rectly pertinent to the Inquiry whether VI man responsible for 1t should receive
 the confidence of the public as a candi7 date for an office of great public trust. 3. Since 1861 this company has done
 business both as a stock and mutual
 company.
 4. Tn the year 1898, said company
 finally settled a suit which had been brought against 1t by the insurance II comm missioner for the improper diver sion Of funds from ttss |. mutual policy
 holders to the account of it's stockhoidi CTS. The amount of this alleged iri- : proper diversion Of funds was $6,000,000 q of assets, or a total of over $4000, ,000 in increased stock and dividends largely , from it's mutual account. (Report 32, part IL, LVI.. lvii.)
 5. When the case was ready for trial
 on the facts alleged all demurrers hay ing been overruled and the complaint
 having been sustained, said compainy, linstead of proceeding to dlsprove the
 charges, settled the case by restoring
 to the mutual account s317,701 in cash
 and million dollars in reserves with the connected policies. l33 part II.yp. lHi.) Such compromise and surrender x of so large an amount appears to be, in effect, a confession of Judgment and an admission that the allegations of fact X were 50 well founded that the policy ! pursued could not be successfully de- , tended.
 6. The methods by which these enor- } nous profits had been made by the , stockholders, to the prejudice of-the ], mutual policyholders. are fully set forth in the complaint, and are clearly sum-
 marized in the decision overruling de i, murrers of Judge Wheeler. (Part IL, ID. Iiv., LxxV.) In furtherance of this . policy legislation for increased capital
 izatior was obtained over Governor < Hubbard's veto in 1878, and again in < 1883. The little pocket of stock" was :. thus increased from an original paid-uI < capital of $105, ,O00 to $1,75O,000, largely, x as alleged, from the profits of the mu- tual department.
 2. In 1878 Governor Hubbard, a man of clear-minded honesty, after search Z ing inquiry, characterized such methods
 as 'scandalously unjust" and as fin ] EtheS interests. of the few, and to the
 prejudice of a multitude of men and
 women, who, out of their penury, are ] striving to make, provision for their surviving children and dependents" ltSee Veto Message in Journal of the Senate, 1878, p. 561.)
 These allegations of a wrongful diver- sion of funds from the many depend- | ents to the few who profited by them . remain in the public records of this }, state compromised, but untriedset- tiled, but not disproved. Until they are !, tried out and disproved should any man . who is to any extent responsible for
 this transaction, and who personally prfits by it, presume to come before you s and nsk for. inc honor from vn111. ha ,1je