The Washington herald., 1911-02-05
UNTERMYER SUES
PRESIDENT PEABODY
Lawyer Hurt by Remarks of
Insurance Man.

New York, Feb. 4-Attorney Samuel
Untermyer has filed an action in the Su-
prene Court to recover $4,000 damages
from Charles A. Peabody. president of the
Mutual Life Insurance Company, for al
legged defamation Of character.
Untermyer charges that the insurance
head held him up to public ridicule and
censure by causing to be circulated a
statement which Untermyer declares is
untrue In these alleged remarks by
Peabody the lawyer says he was branded
as "butter-in'' and a person the COM
munity regarded as untrustworthy
Untermyers complaint says that prior
to April 10 last the superintendent of in
surance filed a report of his investiga-
tion of the affairs of the Mutual Life In
surance Company, in which he is alleged
to have stated among other things that
during the campaign Of 1906, Of the in
surance company for election of the trus-
tees of the company, the company in
creased its advance to agents by more
than double any other quarter of that
year. The report also stated. it is
claimed. that the cf,mpany expended dur
ing the campaign upward of s16s.ooO more
than it was authorized to spend by a
committee of the board of directors.
Cntermyer says his attention was called
to the report, and that on or about April
is last he made a public comment on it.
Prior to this time he had acted as coun-
sci for a committee of policy holders of
the Mutual His comments were circu-
lated in the daily press. and a copy of
them shown to President Peabody.
On April 10. the complainant declares,
cd rovlx in h;.b l<
criticised Mr.. Untermyer as follows:
THE statement of Mr.. Untermyer only
shows that he has INDUCED once more
his propensity for 'buttng in and at
taching his name to anything which may
involve little passing notoriety.
His remarks are as S.ithfuI as most Of
his utterances. that is to say. there is
not one word of truth in them.
He (meaning the plaintiffO made two
proposals to me Peabody). either one of
which would have involved my betray-
ing the Interests OF the policy holders
and directly contributed to his inordinate
vanity and greed.
But 1 waste words in expressing my
opinion of the gentleman in question. nv
opinion is that of the business community
generally"
The answer to the complaint denies
that the criticism of Untermyer was
".
The defendant claims that the words cor
others" should have been inserted after
the words either one Of which would
have involved my betraying the interests
Of policy holders. Untermyer 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
JWe Untermyer. It denies also that any
of the company's resources were used in
the 1906 election for trustees; that money
was used Improperly in the election. or
that advances to AGENTS were larger dur-
ing this period. Mr. Peabody declares
that the election was fair. and that II
was free Of control of the agency force.
Supreme Court Justice Gerard to-day
granted an application Of the plainttf !
to take the testimony OF James E. VIM
ian1s. assistant manager and cashier Of |
the Mutual In Louisville, KY, ana Of the
following Louisville men: Frank L. Mod
Owen w. Thomas, and Heary n, FIex.
ner. 1t i1 claimed these man knov a.
elleged expendlturss Of aseney "a tAe |
1neurancs eaeetiea q ~