The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1906-07-21
Tells Grand jury He Came
From New York to Fleece
Policy-Holders in Eagle
SUPERIOR JUDGE
MAKES HIM TALK
Confession Is Corroborated
by Adjuster Sent Here
by the Same Corporation

N ONE startling facts were revealed
to the Grand Jury yesterday aft
~ ernoon during its investigation of
the methods employed by the va
rious Insurance companies In paying
policy-hoIders. The testimony of III. c.
Quimby. New York attorney sent here
by the Eagle Insurance Company it's
Representative, and n. r. Manners. an
adjuster from New York, also working
for the same company, shows that many
companies have NO Intention of dealing
squarely with the public I'm settling
It's losses. 1t was only after Superior
threatened to send Quimby to Jail for
contempt that the New York lawyer
consented TO answer certain questions
put to him. He held as a lawyer he
was NOT compelled to answer certain
questions, buf after he WAS Informed
by Judge Graham that he must do so
or go to Jail ne nnaIIy consented.
The entire afternoon was spent by
the jury in the insurance investiga-
tion. Though several other matters
were scheduled to be discussed they
had to be postponed !. Four witnesses
were called Carl schlingheyds, an as-
juster for the Transatlantic InsuraH He
Company; Frank Young. an adjuster
for the Springfield Company: r. r.
Manners, an adjuster for the Eagle
Company, and H.. c. QuinDy.- attorney
for the Eagle. Schlingheyde and Young
were called for the purpose of giving
some inside factsNas to the workings of
insurance companies and to assist the
jury in its investigation.
When Quimby was called ]. F. Bran
nan. foreman of the jury. asked him
who his clients were and he fatty re-
fused to reply, maintaining that as
lawyer he was not compelled TO answer
the question. holding that section 1sS
of the Civil Code. which reads as fol-
lows, exempted him:
IAN attorney cannot without the
consent of his client. be examined as to
any communication made by his client
to him or his advice given thereon in
the course of professional employment,
nor can an attorney. secretary. stem
ographer or clerk be examined without
consent of his employer concerning any
fact or knowledge OF which has been
acquired in such capacity"
Superior Judge Graham was then
sent for and after he had consulted the
statute it was discovered that Quimby
was admitted before the Supreme Court
of New York but under certain sec
tion of the Civil Code of this State he
had not taken the necessary steps to
practice here Quimby then admitted
that ne had consulted T. c. Van Ness.
local lawyer. who advised him not to
reveal to the Grand Jury the companies
he represented. At this stage Judge
Graham informed the representative Of
the Eagle that he would be sent to
prison for contempt If he did not tell
asked to see the code and then declared
he was trapped and was willing to an
swer the questions.
He said he arrived In this city on
April rs from New York to represent
the Eagle Company. &c admitted the
company wns pursuing p dishonorable
policy with it's clients, s.nling It's poll
cies. and using fake photographs to
compel policy-holders to accept a small
percentage on the dollar. He said he
was employed by eight other companies
mt fee of $500 to act as an attorney
for them, and wns advised by these
companies to pursue the same course
for them as for the Eagle, and to slice
nnd scale wherever there was a chance.
He did not remember all the companies
he represented, but mentioned among
them the Royal of London, the Phenfx
of brooklyn, the Transatlantic, the
Federal, the Hanover and the NIL
waukee Mechanics. He declared he
would give the names of the other
companies at the next meeting.
Quimby testified also that the Eagle.
instead of using the Official reports Of
| the underwriters. made false ones to
deceive their clients. He admitted
having some of these fake reports in
his possession, but not on his person,
and agreed TO produce them before the
Continued ON Page ?, Column A.