The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-02-06
INTERVIEWER ASKS.
S5O,OOODANAGE
Feels Aggricved in That Amount
by Remarks Of Charles
A. Peabody.
ISpocinl 40 Thc l.imns-nisnaich |

n. |
Ncw York, February J.--Attorner
samuel untcrmeycr has fled an action
in Supreme Court 10 recover s5o.Op1
damages from Charles a. Peabody
president Of the Mutual Life Insurance
Company. for alleged defamation Of
chara cter.
Untermeycr charges that tho in
surancc company had held him up to
public ridiculc and cenSurc By causing
to be circulated q statement which I'm
tcrmeyer declares is untrue.
In these alleged remarks by Peabody,
the lawyer says he was branded as a
butter in and person whom the
company regards as untrustworthy.
Untermcyers complaint says that
prior to April 10 last the superinten.
dent Of insurance filed a report of his
investigation OF the affairs OF the Mu.
tna1 Life Insurance Company. in which
he is alleged to have stated. among
other things. that during tho campaign
OF 1906 OF tho insurance company for
the election OF trustees Of the company,
the company increased It's advances to
agents by more than double any other
quarter of that year. The report also
stated. it is claimed, that the company
extended during the campaign upward
of s16S,000 more than it was authorized
to spend by committee OF the board
of directors.
Untcrmeyer says his attention was
called to the report and that on or
about April is last. he made public
statement TO the policyholders for the
Mutual.
His comments were circulated In the
daily press and copy of them was
shown to President Peabody. On April
10, the complainant declares Peabody
dictated a reply In which he criticized
Mr.. Untermeyer as follows:
The statement Of Mr. Untermeyel
more NOR his propensity for putting In and
attaching his name to anything which
may involve a little passing notoriety
His remarks are as truthful as most
of his utterances, hat Is TO say. there
Is not one word of truth In them.
He (meaning the plainttff) made
two. proposals to me Peabody. either
one OF which would have involved my
hetraying the interests of the policy
holders and directly contributed to
his inordinate vanity and greed.
But I waste words In expressing my
opinion of the gentleman In question
munity generally"
The answer to the complaint denies
that the criticism OF Untermeyer was
The defendant claims that the words
"or others should have been inserted
after the words either one Of which
would have involved my hetraying the
interests OF policyholders. Untcrmeyer
Informed the court that the answer
admits the substance of the remarks.
The answer denies. however. that the
remarks were made with intent to in
ture Untermeyer. It denies also that
any Of the company's resources were
used in the 1906 election of trustees;
that money was used improperly III the
election or that advances to agents
were larger during this period. Mr.
Peabody declares that the election was
fair and that 1t was free OF control OF
the agency force.
Supreme Court Justice Gerard grant
ed an application OF the plaintiff to
take the testimony Of James. T. Will
liams, assistant manager and cashier
of the Mutual, in Louisville, Ky. and
OF the following Louisville mon: Frank
L. Mood, Owen ". Thomas and Henry
NJ FleXner. 1T Is claimed these men
know of alleged expenditures Of money
in the insurance election OF 1905