New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1906-02-09

amount OF pi
lowed by the sae on The pPece Of the state IS
not 10 refund such overpayments. but to allow ION
credit there was deducted the amount of the con-
panys for the year 800 anout ~ s,5s as sb
The State also allows a company so oyerpayng TO
a5mnsnes who can use il 10 pay their taxes, the
assignee companies paying the amount OF fheir
ia sN t6e State 80 e on june is 1907 the company
signed ss2s 4 s 81 s 600 thereof to four other
companies a total OF s9o5se a. That sum na was
companies and has been retained by him without
any entry thereof in the books of the COMPANY
SAY HAMILTON SHOULD PROVE TITLE.
explanation given Of this transaction rs ' AM
arrangement with Hamilton whereby there was 10
be instituted he gyadty of the
ton put upon the act by the State Controller TO the
esei ma Issued bfore II e sn On into eject and
succeeded he was 10 be entitled to Hs the
total amount saved by the final decision OF the
case was s272, 7os a. tie amount to which Hamil-
ton would be entitled under this arrangenent for
bis Zee in conducting the case amounts to $50 so O
received under the assignments 10 which reference
The position Of your committee TO this matter
is that the company cannot under the crcum-
rangemenr was made. the company Is bound by II;
that The sums 2 Tch ref s has een made
should be treated as money Of the COMPANY IN ms
burden should be imposed upon him 10 establish
whether he is legally entitled 10 retain them as his
following items upon nth, The pg S5iic% Of f the
Paris office. charged to what Is oalleo foi'E rec
Account:
Aas 2I-Remt,snoe Mccall in London SGon 1850 200
Sept. 14-R,mttanee TO Andrew Hamilton at Al ssn 600
or pan 4.Rcmttance to Andrew Hamilton 10000
Nov 27-R.mittance to Andrew Hamilton. .... 2''o"
Apr 2t-Remittance to Andrew Hamilton 1000 1000
Noy ia-Remittance Andrew Hamilton l4'ooo
These ttsnees were A. mace 6ta f. a aam presde6 Py
the order and direction OF MI Me- az 81 3p I'D $500
in August and September, 1900 We're directe6 ,n ny
him to be charged TO Andrew Hamilton Scc9" ;
II is only recently that the committee received IN
formation of these payments made from me tas
ONCE and such papers and documents az rith
were in that office bearing upon or connected WIS ~I,n
them These items 90 p"1 app pd FOR the reason
that only the balance OF the so-caed poncy zee
included the reports made monthly by tne Fd bv
Office to the home Office ana thab Is ' MAS no know
edge Of them at the h9me ONCE b ana c6nveHed by
the direction of the president to cable an order tat
After diligent inquiry your committee mas pes. beet
unable ascertain the purposes fon w d an drew
remittances were made to MI McSa and nut The
officials of the home office and Paris once nave
no ana documents disclose none Application
has been made 10 Mr. Mccall for ms ms ma;
his ply steal condition is such that te
There is no other source from which The informa
ton can now be obtained. but the committee VIII
reports TO throw more light on subject. Both MIR
Mccall and Hamilton are accounta3Ie 10 te he
pany for these sums. and proceeGlnss snou Ilent
instituted against them to compel their repayment
Since the disclosure OF these payments the policy
fee account the Paris books has been closed as
separate debit and credit account. and hereafter
the moneys received from that source will be ac-
received at the paris Office so that sums of money
can longer be paid from and charged TO that
account
HAMILTONS DEMAND NOTES
Hamilton gave demand notes to the Central Ma
tona Bank on the following dates and for the FOL
lowing sums:
october c 1896 $4,000
April 81 1897 for ~ UO
May IA 1897, for 1000
Total Sos, 900
In October, 1901 he made his note for $4,000 to
the order of Daniel F. Lynch payable two months
and Trust Company, which was indorsed by Daniel
on October 49, 1901 and November 10. 1901, Edward
mccall da made his M P9tes or @ a6d 90 I r
speetively, payable at the Central National Bank,
dT Sn SSya 10 TO- ,b or 1s of on McGa
at the New-York Security and Trust Companys
Office which notes were Endorsed by John a. Nc
These various notes held by the Central Ina, Ne
Company on December 81, 1901 and the sum ull-
G5 'hs IR Pe eoues a of President Mccall
George W. Perkins caused these notes to be taken
/ 1902 when they were paid by erection of Presi-
6 be @t of 9e sh the s ee9r 2y
Trust Company had In the United States Steel
g being the sum Of S. With p Interest
from DeeembeF 81 1891 to October 1902 given and
to raise mn t be tSs se co by IS ion
Consistent With the Conditions which existed when
The notes we're given No reason is s given th why
poses of the company by discountlng ms own own
A Mccall should given him the necessary
credit to raise money in that way In lsS, ne Drew
annually SiIowsS g and n i sPPs9GGs thss
mere was no limit nfeG Win ri ms fbe presdent
There was therefore no occasion for him in 1884,
g other b to ra sy IN
committee can only SoneTd n sns s6r b on pr
poa that tSe eompay was stranger
the d pSTe mt out 81 the profits of the
pany syndicate was an unwarranted payment out
original Of ,s psrnfidn of G trust com
In the syndicate ana Ie o the stock We're abso-
futeiy subject to the control OF M Perkins Kin and
York Security and Trust Company as registrar and
as the party to DrS9Ge Sa f 5d s m
surance Company should have an interest in the
profits Of the participation.
CoMPANY's RIGHT TO MONEY.
But when he made and consummated the arrange-
pany, with which the insurance company was
heavy depostor. whereby the Security and Trust
participation TO be allotted to it, and tho in
surance company TO have 20 per cent of the
profits of s. $4,000 of the participation tho right OF
the insurance company to that portion OF the
profits became fixed and no could thereafter
without due authority divert them, for the
benefit OF any other person. For the payment of
the notes out OF these profits Mr.. Mccall is pri-
nariiy responsible but by reason OF Mr.. Perkins
having personally made tho payment, notwith-
standing he acted under the direction of the presi
dent of the company your committee is advised
that il should be submitted for legal adjudication
whether he is accountable therefor not 1t is
only Just Mr.. Perkins say that he acted IN
the matter in entire good faith; that he knew
nothing about the notes their origin; that from