The Birmingham age-herald., 1916-10-22
jury, without laying their seats, rendered a verdict of not guilty.

jury, without laying their seats, rendered a verdict of not guilty.
 September 2. 1916, completed the twenty-ninth year of my residence in this county, and was the twenty-ninth anni- versary of my entry into the insurance business here; during that time l have never Intentionally violated the insurance laws of my state. I did not believe that had done so in the matter which was the basis of the trial of yesterday, and It is gratifying to me to know that the court and jury were of the same opinion.
 It Is not my intention to violate the laws of my country, and believe my past record justifies the statement that
 I have been and am a law-abiding citi- zen.
 In my connection with the insurance business, l have steadfastly refused to become & member of an association formed for the main purpose of increas- ing the cost of insurance, which has be- come business necessity to my fellow citizens, although in the past consider able pressure has been brought to bear to induce me to become such, and in the matter referred to in your report to- day, my offense has been that l have sought to save my neighbors and friends some money on their insurance cost and | to help reduce the burdensome tax en- 1 acted on them by foreign corporations. ] My principal reason for refusing to join | the organization referred to was that l 1 believed it existed in violation of the
 laws, not only of Alabama. but those of | the United States, which forbids the ex- 1 istence of combinations or trusts whose purpose is to control the price of things | for sale. "a
 l This belief became actual knowledge | when the supreme court of Alabama ano 1 the supreme court of the United States l sustained the Alabama law providing that l in the event of loss or damage pen l atty of 9 per cent in addition to any | amount found to be due by any insurance | company could be collected If 1t was \ shown to tho satisfaction of the Jury 1 that said company belonged to, was 1 member of, or in any way connected WILT 1 any tariff association, or such llke enlne
 by whatever name called. or who nae
 made any agreement or had any unoer standing with any other person, corpo ration, or association, engaged Tn tne business as agent or otherwise, about any | particular rate of premium which snouis be charged or fixed for any kind or clas' of insurance risk. There Is. abundan evidence on record in the way Of 1udg ments rendered in the courthouse O. Jefferson county, that there IS a cohipi
 nation existing between companies mem
 bers of the Southeastern Tariff associa
 ton and Southeastern Underwriters as
 sociation for the purpose of controuin'
 and increasing and regulating the pric of insurance.
 This is also against section or tn criminal law, which fact I hope tn
 present grand jury will not overiook as several of it's members are awar of the existence of the insurance trus' I am quite sure that Solicitor Biach !, who has made an enviable reputation Io ability and devotion to duty, will not Ia to prosecute any organization or inul
 vidual who Is found to have Vlolate this law. just as he does others who ar ? presented for violating other laws of th 2 state
 In you article you say: "Immediatei