The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1912-12-28
Subtracts Premiums Total.

Subtracts Premiums Total.
From this $244,O59.2S he subtracts
the total for premiums paid in during
the ten months, as the assets which
should be placed in juxtaposition to
the S244.O59.2S liabilities represented in
the operating expenses OF the business.
This leaves A balance or loss of S55.
1916, as the net losses for the year.
as shown by the report of the insur-
ance department. based on actual busi-
ness done.
This, however. does not take into effect
the increased liabilities Of the company.
although the asset list accounts for the
premiums derived from these increased
liabilities. The company's unearned pre-
MUM liabilities on December 81, 1911, were
t9l. .l2ISl. October 81, 1912, the end Of the
ter months period, the unearned pre-
MUM liabilities amounted to t176. $50. 20.
The difference. or SSS. .SSS. So. represents the
ircreased liabilities through unearned
premimums. This amount Mr.. Redfield
adds to the running expenses for the ten
months. inasmuch as all or part of this
total may be paid out to policy holders
for fire losses. Adding then the $s5. SO
to the running expenses, the difference
between the premiums paid in and the
total running expenses is $l4l.S15.0S. repre-
senting the total loss. This. according
figuring OF Alfred VI. Best & Co. the
insurance experts and reporters.
The defense, through the cross-eXami-
nation of Commissioner Judson, scored
heavily yesterday in developing its con-
tentiOn that the present investigation was
conceived by one circle of bankers op-
posed to the selection either of Eldridge
L. Jordan or Robert n. Harper as in
augurRl chairman. CrOss-examination by
IA Ea Qhy-Sp1ifh GuDarip-
tendent of Insurance Ingham. developed
the following sequence OF events:
That Edward J. Stellwagen, president
of the Union Trust Company. in calling
Commissioner Judson's attention TO the
report on the Commercial and First
National companies, and to literature
distributed by those companies. men,
toned the fact that Jordan was or had
been connected with one or both of these
companies.
Mr.. StelIwagen was OF the opinion that
this connection made Jordan ineligible
for appointment TO the craftsmanship of
the inaugural committee. At Mr. Stell-
wagons request Col. JudSon transmitted
this information to Representative Burle-
son of Texas. close political friend and
adviser OF the Prcsdent-elect.
At a further request from the same
source Judson arranged for a conference
between BurlesOn and Stellwagen at
Judsons Office. Stellwagen then told
Burleson OF Jordan's alleged connection
with the Commercial at some stage.
Concerning Mr.. Jordan.
Judson could not place the day Jordan
told him that he withdrew from the
company last July. Before Burleson
heard this, If he ever did hear it, he
informed Chairman McCombs, of the
&,
tain things concerning Mr.. Jordan which
he had heard from a reputable source
a prominent citizen. which he thought
McCombs ought to know" This was Mt
a meeting December in the Union
Trust Building, at which Charles J.
Bell, president of the Riggs National
Bank, was present in addition to the
parties named.
This sequence was fairly well estab-
lished, part from the testimony of Col.
Judson and part from INFORMATION Of
fered the committee through questions
propounded by Mr.. Easily Smith.
In the face of the figures and deduc-
tions from the report of the affairs of
the Commercial made by the Superin-
tendent of Insurance, the investigators
are not inclined to be greatly worried
by this II is chiefly interesting, how
ever, as tending to throw light upon the
recent miX-up over the inaugural chair
manship, particularly as the name of
Robert N. Harper. president of the Dis
tfict National Bank, must have entered
into-the conversation in the conference
between Messrs. Stellwagen, Bell, Burle-
son, and McCombs, inasmuch as Mr..
Harper's name appears on the stationery
of the Commercial as a director.
Differed with Colleagues.
The testimony of Cuno H. Rudolph, |
President of the Board of District |
established the fact
that he was at variance with his coll
leagues only on the question as to the
best way of pursuing an investigation |
into the Commercial and First National |
Fire Insurance companies. Mr.. Ru-
dolph was in favor of calling a con-
ference between the Commissioners. |
the SUPERINTENDENT of insurance, and |
of the two companies, |
and requiring an explanation OF the |
figures in the Ingham report before |
suggesting any Congressional activity. |
Mr.. Rudolph's testimony also cleared |
up the charge against Ingham that |
prior to his appointment as superin-
tendent of insurance he had accepted |
money from some one who desired a /