Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-02-28
WIDOW GETS MONEY
Compromise of Claim Filed for
Life Insurance.
MAN PUT TO DEATH BY LAW
Company Accepts Premium From
Big Bill" Travis, Knowing
He Was Condemned.

NEW YORK, February 2s.-The Metro
politan Life Insurance Company has
ended a novel and interesting legal dis
pute by sending check to the widow or
| Adolph Bertchey, alias, big Bill Travis,
the burglar, put to death in the state
prison at Trenton, n. j., last August. for
murder.
Bertchey's life was insured for $1,000.
His widow, now a resident Of this city,
was the beneficiary named in the policy.
The officers of the insurance company
at first refused to pay the insurance
money, maintaining that in applying for
the policy Bertchey misstated his &C.
cupation. alleging that he was a travel
ing salesman, when in fact he was a
professional burglar. Had they known
that he was engaged in the hazardous
occupation of robbery, they argued. they
would never have accepted him as risk
at any price. They contended further
that death by legal execution was never
contemplated when they entered into
| their contract with Bertchey. and that as
his own act in killing man was directly
responsible for his death he was to all
intents and purposes a suicide. and that
for this reason they should not be held
under the policy.
Company's Act Favors Claimant.
Fortunately for Mrs. Bertchey," said
William Drummer. the lawyer who press
ed the widows claim, 1--WE were in a po-
sition to prove that subsequent to the
time the death sentence was imposed
| upon Bertchey and with a full knowledge
| that he had been condemned to death the
officers of the insurance company ac
| copied a quarterly premium on the pol
| icy. There was an interesting story back
| of the insurance matter that did not come
out at the time. Bertchey's wife had
spent the last dollar of their savings i'm
defending him while he was on trial for
| his life. When she suggested to Bert
| chey that she might raise money for an
appeal on the insurance policy he posi-
| lively ordered her to do nothing of the
kind. He argued that there was little
| chance of securing new trial and that
he preferred to have the death sentence
carried out while he was strong men
| tally and physically. He was afraid that
| long confinement pending the appeal
might cause him to lose his nerve.
I'm spite of his protests Mrs. Bertchey
| took the policy to the Office of the in
| surance company. She told its officers
| that her husband was under sentence
of death and that If he was executed
| the policy would become due. The only
way they could protect themselves. she
| pointed out, was to save his life by ad-
vancing the money for new trial. She
offered to sell the policy to them and
consent to it's cancellation II they would
pay her one-quarter of its face value.
| The matter was taken up at a meeting
| of the directors of the insurance COM
pany, and after celebrating they decided
| not to accept the offer and to fight the
| claim when the policy should mature. 1t
was after this that they accepted pay
ment of a quarterly premium.
Issue Never Decided.
THE question whether an insurance
company must pay policy on the life
of a man legally executed has never
been tried in the courts of this state
The insurance company in support of
it's position, however, cited the case of
Burt against the Union Central Life
United States Supreme Court in 1902
| in which practically the same question
was involved. The Burt case was
pany. the decision being based on the
old English case of the Amicable So
ciety against Bolland. decided by the
house of lords In 1879 80 ut 1t was there
not one Of the risks covered by the
policy of insurance. and that there is
an implied obligation on the part of an
assured to do nothing to wrongfully
accelerate the maturity of the policy.
and further. that it is against public
policy to pay insurance on the life of a
''I AS , directly opposed to the DECISION Of
the United States Supreme Court Mr.
Drummer cited a decision of the SUI
preme court of the state of Illinois by
which the Metropolitan Life Insurance
Company, as recently as December, 1907.
was directed to pay the policy, on the
life of a murderer named Fitzpatrick.
who was legally executed. In this case
the court held that the argument upon
which the decision of the federal court
is based rests upon the same grounds
rtn In nf 40
now obsolete doctrine OF attainder and
corruption of blood.
Mr. Drummer was anxious to try the
question at issue in the courts, but as
Mrs. Bertchey was urgently in need of
ready cash she compromised with the
insurance company.