New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-04-26
rANDERPoEL AND HUNTER.

The weakest point in Superintendent Otto
Kelsey's position and the one hardest for him
to defend is his retention until recently IN his
department of Robert II. Hunter as first deputy
and Isaac Vanderpoel as chief examiner. These
two men were hOpeleSSly diScredited by the
Armstrong insurance investigation. They were
the embodiment Of the old system Of state in
surance regulation system that had been re-
vealed as a lamentable failure. In them the
old system preserved its continuity. Superin-
tendents came and superintendent went, but
Hunter and Vanderpoel remained in office-the
men who knew how things were managed. who
knew the business Of the department from be
ginning TO end, whom new superintendent
leaned for guidance in the conduct of the de-
partment OF them the insurance report says
that superintendent allowed them ito conduct
examinations in their way practically
without direction or interference" Their long
and uninterrupted experience made them au-
thOritieS in the department to whom superin-
tendents turned with a recognition of their IN
Responsibility. 1t was apparently with some
thing of this feeling that Ar. Kelsey approached
the task of supervising insurance He did not
know how to get along without Hunter and
NanderpOel. He did not know how to dispense
with the men who knew the practical workings
of the department And this is. as we under
stand it, essentially the Superintendent de
fence: He needed Vanderpoel and Hunter until
he could get his bearings" and one of them is
still Indispensable, while the other was retained
In Office until January Of this year,
1t is only necessary TO read the report OF
the Armstrong committee to see how unfit these
men were to be retained in Office and how i'm
possible would be a reorganization Of the de
partment with these men as Indispensable au-
thorites from whom the Superintendent should
get his bearings" We reprint elsewhere some
of the testimony of both men taken before the
insurance investigators, and it proves conclu-
sively that neither man did his duty. or had the
faintest conception of his duty, in protecting the
public from the proved and frankly
knOwledged evils OF the old system OF inSur-
anCe company administration They never
found anything wrong in insurance manage
ment. because they never sought to find any
thing wrong. All the evils that the Armstrong
committee disclosed went on under their eyes
without their unearthlng them, or, at any rate
informing the public through the department at
Albany Of the existence of any Of them. Their
conception of their duty was 10 see that the
insurance companies were solvent. Any abuse
or irregularity might be practised by the com
panles 50 long as ii did not threaten their solv-
ency. Extravaganza might waste the policy
holders money long as the books, super
fcially examined, showed a balance We call
the attention OF cur readers to the concluding
words Of an extract which we print elsewhere
from Vanderpoels testimony:
Q.-The examinations OF the department have
been no check whatever upon waste OF man
agement; they have not been intended 10 be?
A.-Not been intended to be
Q-There has been effort TO ascertain
whether money has been expended properly or
improperly? A-Not that 1 know Of
The answers TO these two questions explain
why the Insurance Department failed to learn
Of and cure the insurance evils until they grew
to scandalOus proportions and had TO be made
the subject of legislative inquiry. They are the
key to Vanderpoel and Hunter We submit
that men who had no higher conception OF their
duties than the answers to those questions dis
close were not proper men to look to for guild
ance and inspiration In the reorganization of
the Insurance Department. They were not men
TO get true bearings from. In retaining them
and making them his trusted advisers Mr.. Kel-
sey showed that he did not appreciate the de-
DaTtments needs of reorganization, and made
a conclusive case for his own removal