The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1906-11-10
Commissioner PreWitt ReVOkts
License Of the Company
HEARING GIVEN IN NEW YORK
Untermyer and Cromwell Have Some
Lively Tits In Injunction Pro
ceedines Against New
York Life.

Frankfort, Ky. November 9.-Attorneys
today representing the Mutual Life In
surance company of New York, and
President Charles 4. Peabody of that
company, secured from the Franklin
county circuit clerk an injunction direct
ed against State Insurance Commissioner
Henry R. Prewitt restraining the COM
missioner from revoking the license of
the company to do business in the Ken
lucky field.
The notice of injunction was served on
Commissioner Prewitt at noon before he
made public his opinion, but he stated
that the license was revoked last night
Prewitt Defends Action.
In statement issued this afternoon in
support of his action revoking the license
of the Mutual Life Insurance company
of New York 10 do business in Kentucky
Commissioner Prewitt says the position
of the present management of that COM
pany in endeavoring to elect the admin
istration candidates for trustees is eop-
pressive, dictatorial and unlawful, and a
company thus managed should not be
permitted to further insure the lives of
the people of this state"
In part the statement reads.
In my opinion, the agents of the COM
pany are required to be loyal, first to
have grounds for belief, that the present
management of the company is not wise,
nor for the best interests of the policy
holders, it is not only the privilege, but
the duty of such agents, to say so to the
policyholders. 1t is mistaken notion that
the agents owe personal allegiance to the
present board of trustees or to any board
TIC Law. 20 the company.
Considers Them Destructive.
II regard the plan of procedure of Mr.,
Peabody and of his colleagues, as being
destructive of the essential features of
mutually; as tending to prevent II full.
fair and free presentation of the policy
holders rights TO them by those who are
best in the position to know, who the
policyholderS are and what their interests
are; that such action Is contrary to the
spirit of the charter of the company and
if tolerated would destroy absolutely the
mutual feature.
After full and careful considera-
ton of the charges made against the
management of the Mutual Life Insur-
ance company of New York, / have
reached the conclusion that the company
should not be permitted to continue to
insure the lives of the citizens of this
state. The present polcyholders of the
company can, in no way, be affected by
my action. A continuation of the au-
thority heretofore granted the company
would be an endorsement of the acts of
the present and past arrangements OF this
company
Seeks Injunction Against Company.
New York, November 9.-Arguments on
the motion brought by Stephen j. Far
reilly against the New York Life Insur-
ance company for an injunction restrain
ing the officers and trustees of the COR
poration from spending the company's s
funds for campaign purposes were con-
tnued today in the supreme court
At the previous hearing Samuel Inter
myer, who represents Farrelly, claimed
that the whole office force of the New
York office was turned into an cleo
tioneering apparatus. with the idea Of
keeping down and violating the only pro-
vision in the new law preventing the
stuffing of ballot boxes. Speaking today
for the New York Life company, William
Nelson Cromwell said that the papers
before the court were simply founded on
informations and belief. lie contended
that the allegations are visionary, and
have no basis in fact. He further assert
ed that he would present affidavits made
by every active officer of the company
showing that not cent of the companys
fund has been expended for campaign
expenses.
Have you an affidavit by Vice Presi-
dent Perkins?" asked Mr.. Untermyer.
''He Is not an active vice president of
the company" retorted Mr.. Cromwell.
Cromwell Is Emphatic.
Mr.. Cromwell asserted that there was
not the slightest truth or a scintlla of
evidence to show tnat any of the COM
pany's funds had been expended for cam
paign purposes, but said there is over
whelming proof that such was not the
case. He declared that the charges are
baseless, and simply grew out of Mr..
Untermyer's imagination.
Mr.. Cromwell asserted that Farrelly
has no property rights In action, being
simply a creditor.
HAS he not a right to take part in the
election?' broke in Untermyer
Il am not questioning the defendant s
right in that respect but on the broader
grounds of the law" replied Mr. Crom-
well. Il am not interposing any legal
barriers, but / assert that the company
has complied with the law of 1906. and
has not violated the provisions of any
law. 1t Is inconceivable that we are to
stand helpless while assassns of reputa-
tions stab us In the back and not protect
ourselves from the assaults of 100 men
or a dozen group of men who might seek
to obtain control of the vast interests"
''Do you maintain s--at u campaign can
be carried on at the company's EXPENSE"
asked Mr. Untermyer.
NO" replied Mr.. { tromwell.
'"rhat Is all / want to klow" 81 "a M.
Cntermyer.
''You will know more before : ger
through with my arguments "etorted
Mr.. Cromwell
Has Complied With Law.
Mr.. Cromwell argued that tha'e was
nothing in the documents bcbore the cours
indicating that the company had aone q
single thing save to comply with the law.
Mr.. Cromwell asserted mat Injunction
has not power or jurisdiction 10 tai. :
away The freedom OF the agents, not o.
fore the court, and iJid the granting %
Injunction would be a great injur. TO the
defendant, and would In effect lie the
determination in a divorce of 9 suit IN
the plaintiffs favor
1.-THE election is now on, sd'a N.Y.