The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-03-24

suranoe Company Of 81 Petersburg WA
the next wItnesS Mr. Hotchkias fires
right away AZ tn" Grady reins rance Law
and asked the witness to explain how
pOlICyholders benefited by ~ Mr. Stur
hahn ~. that ~ benefited the policy
holders h"Caus" = made the direct insur
s1nce companies keep full reserve
The witness told Mr. HotChkiss thai
Buckley WAS retained 10y his company al
e5aD the first year. S75O III" second ana
si.u0 - year afi"rward. lie was to gsl
$3.50 upon the AdrnIssion II the Rossia
ia this state Buckley he said. had ~
sisted the company IA a good many state.
and had b-''i' pad separately for each
job
la answer to Mr. Hotchk,ss's question
about t51O paid To Buckley in 1874. Stur
hahn replied hat II was for legal services
but d.nI..d hat ~ was for he. paasaRa of
the GRADY bull There was mo- arrange
ment whereby the other companies Con-
trihui"d to a fund for Buckley ne said
Buckley resigned his job ~ counsel four
weeks after the inSIIranC. examiners
visited ia" offi,,-s Of the Rossa.
Won wrote To RICka'y IN January Is
1910. Ia ask HIM To- give you "a delta, Ird
statement Of his s~rviC~,s'-
Yes
And he wrote hack that II WAS IN usIr,
3 for employing counsel m Albany IA 1874
1885, 1853. 1877 and iss:'
Yes.
In 1897 and isJs was not the Cobb h,lI
introduced to repeal IN" GRADY clause.
discriminating in favor of volT Cnrnnany
and two other reinsurance companissy-
never heard about the Cobb hill said
tho witness until ! read about u IN the.
newspapers yesterday
Was II not IN these two years that vo,I
paid over 81 O0 extra TO Mr.. Bucklev.-
hOtChkIss asked.
Yes
And was not the Cobb bill defeated each
OF these years.
I don't know
III was said Mr.. Hotchkis.s who did
know
Mr. Sturhahn thought that IN. bill
drawn by Mr. Hotchkiss to repeal the
Grady hill was -cLaSs Legislation M.
said IN he did not know senator Grady
When asked why the payments 20 Buckley
were not entered on the books of the
Rossla as legal expenses he replied that
he didn't consider them th-t
1904 WAS GOOD YEAR FoR BUCKLEY
The last witness Of the morning session
was Carl Schreiner. American mana ger
for the Munich Reinsurance Company
He said that Buckley had represented
hls company at Albany 10 1904 and that
he had been paid only $50 for doing IL
Mr.. Srhrelner knew all about the Grady
hill and was very indignant over the news
paper statements to the effect that two
or three foreign Companies benefited
by Il while the 200 odd American com
pGnles Uttered Mr. Schreinsr denied
having anything 90 do with the drawing
OF the bill or is passage He admitted
however. making an additional payment
OF $3.50 70 Buckley IN 1914 For what
services Buckley got this the witness
didn't state The check for this 81 .SOO
hes not turned up vet. hut Mr. Schrviner
- gong To try 20 locate a. he promised
Mr Hotchkis- wants 90 500 the indorse-
msnt-
with Mr. Buckley2- asked HOtchklss
In 1873 or isod Before that we had
Mr. Mccall
You mean Judge McCan9 When b.
eece m" judge he recommended Mr.
Buckley
Yes ar
Mr. Schr~iner told Mr. Hotchkiss that
BuCkey's services hsd never been ~
any benefit 10 him. because h" never
accomplished anything
Then why did Won retain hlmP- asked
Mr. Hotchkr-9.
Well. W. had hopes
Mr. toTu.n testified yesterday that
you told hun that the Grady hill was
gong Ia 20 through and that YOU were
gong 10 pay for u gong through
Mr. Corr-a - mistaken. never said
that
DR GoLDBEEG ptNIFS
George S..vard vas recalled a. tho
beginning e IN" afternoon session 10
cause Il -Inn denuls that had h.-en
forthcoming a. result II his testimony
the DAY lefurs tine " these deptaIs
was presented N person Nv Dr Incub
to'dt"rR, who had taken the first train
he could ge' nut - Buffalo after reading
that Mr seward had testified that when
be Goldherg. was an Assemhlvman Iu
liSH b" had come &" the witness and asked