The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1910-04-18
Attempt to Collect McCurdy's
Debt to Insurance Company
Costs More Than Is Real
lied by the Procedure.
REPORT TELLS SECRETS
LEARNED BY PR0BERS
Committee Charged With Bad
Faith in Its Findings Sub
mitted to the Association
of Policy Holders.
BUSINESS NOW ON SQUARE

New York, April 1.-THE first in
vestigation Of the Mutual Life Insur-
ance company undertaken by the state
since Governor Hughes uncovered the
scandals of 1906 has been completed
by superintendent Of Insurance Hotch-
kiss and develops these facts:
First-The final efforts of the new
management 10 recover $1,000, 600 from
the late preside 1t Richard A. McCurdy
and his associates of the old manage
ment. resulted IN net outgO of S237,-
54S more than the company received
from the McCurdys
SecOnd-Since the Armstrong law
went into effect the Mutual expense of
maintenance and administration has
dropped from $15.720, 9O1 in 1904, the
year before the Armstrong inVestiga-
ton, TO SGt51,lS6 i'm 1905 while the
volume of business remained about the
same.
TbirdEAs late DIS 1906 agents of the
company were still active eampaigners
IN the interests of directors seeking
reelection, although the report does
not charge this was done at the in
st1gatlon Of the directors themselves
or with their cOnnivance For these
eleCtlOEeering services agents of the
company received in 1906, S16S.351 of
policy holders moneys.
Fourth-As late as 1908 payments %
agents aggregattng $354144, which did
not appear on the books of the COM
ness. but, nevertheless. believed by
the department 10 be such paid in vio-
latlon of the Armstrong law were
traced TO the Boston office. There IS
no record Of them i'm the home office.
In Boston they are charged to super
vision of old business which is to say,
to prevent the iapsing of old policies
Charges Bad Faith.
superintendent Hotchkiss character
ICES the report submitted by the COM
panys committee, which recommends
the acceptance of the compromise with
the McCurdys, as untrue in at least
two particulars and deceptive in one
more. And il seems TO US" ne con-
tlnued either the committee did not
know the facts or purpOseiy misied the
board of directors"
Nevertheless, 1t is said the report on
the whole is complimentary to the COM
pany- The examiners ind the company
has complied in the main with the in
surance law as amended by the Arm
strong committee.
The examiners believe the exDendi-
ture of the policy holders money foc
questionable purposes has been defin-
iteIy ended.
The examiners stale" saws the re-
port, proper restraints have been
placed by the company upon the supply
department, where expenditures for
legislative and other improper pur-
poses were concerned by recurrence Of
such practices"
Returns to policy holders have been
increased spondingiy. Dividends
paid in 1904 amounted to S2674.206 and
in 1908 to $50 311,2 The report ex-
plains, however, one reason for this
significant increase was that many
deferred dividend policies matured DUR
ing the years 1923.
Charles A Peabody, president of the
Mutual Life Insurance company when
asked TO comment upon the Ieport,
said.
"The only subject in the report of the
examiner. of the department requiring
comment is that relating to settlement
of the cOmpany's claims against former
officers of the company.
The proposals of settlement were re-
ferred by the board of trustees to a
committee Of trustees consisting of Ben
jamin +. Tracy. lawyer. Edwin s. Mars
ton. president of the Farmers Loan ana
Trust company; II. Rieman Duval. pres
ident of the American Beet Sugar COM
panN; II. W. Taft, Of Strong & Calder
valdez. and p. H. Eaton, president OF
the American Car and Foundry COM
pany during the period I'm which these
claims arose.
"This committee acted under the ad-
vice and approval of Messrs. Joseph
Choate and James McKeen. the COM
panys counsel having the matter in
charge. They held meetings extending
over three weeks. examined facts and
circumstances. upon Wnich the claims
of the company were based, and made a
report to the trustees, recommending
settlements, which were afterward
made.
'The examiner of the insurance de-
partment has reached a different con-
clusion on the same facts and eircum-
stances. Whether these seven gentle
ment acted wisely in their conclusion
or. as stated in the report did not un-
ders tand the subject, or 'purpOsely mis-
led the board Of trustees, / leave the
policy holders. TO whom we are ac-
cOuntable to judge. The comparing of
their judgment and integrity with that
of the examiner of the department pre-
sents q ques ton which / do not care
to discuss"