The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-02-26
BRANDEIS EXPLAINS.
Tells Why He Changed His Mind on
Shoe Machinery Trust.

WASHINGTON, Feb 25.-The allega-
tions of President s W. Winslow Of
the United Shoe 1chinery company
that Louis D. Brandeis of Boston in
his recent testimony before the SEN
ate Interstate commerce commission
criticised acts of tn company which
occurred while he was q director and
counsel in it were answered today in
a letter from Mr.. BrandeiS to Senator
! Clapp of Minnesota. chairman of the
1 committee. Mr.. Brandeis asked thAt
his letter be embodied in the hearing
Of the committee Is supplementary. To
| tie testimony he gave on December
A. 10 and IS last.
| Referring to Mr.. Winslow's letter TO
the committee as presenting half
! truths and statements some of them
false and other grossly misleading .
! Mr.. Brandeis explains In detail how
and why he became convinced that
the policy and methods of the United
! Sh g Machinery company We're neon
sistent with the general welfare and
that additional legislation was neces-
sary to protect the public against the
practices of that trust.
Mr.. Brandeis declares that while II
was true that in April, 1906, he believed
i'm the policies and metl DDS of the conf
panv as legally and morally unobjec-
tionab]e he withdrew as a director
few months later when he alleges
different set of circumstances devel-
oped Mr. Brandeis says he was of
the opinion at first that there were
good and bad trusts and that the shoe
monopoly ~as icing operated enefi-
cially and promoting competition. As
a consequence, he dds, he appeared
before the Massachusetts legislature TO
oppose a bill seeking to compel
change in the metl, rods of the company.
Meanwhile. relates Mr.. Brandeis, his
attention was called by President w
H. McFlwaine of this Dmpany bearing
that name and President Charles HI
Jones of the Commonwealth Shoe and
Leather company to the so-called ''ty-
ing" clauses of their leases which
seemed to them Objectionable At
{ Conference between these men and MT
Winslow an understanding was reached
to secure the defeat of the pending
bill and adjust differences in araicable
conferences. After these objections had
been presented Mr.. Brandeis asserts, he
pursued the subject and ascertained
facts to some extent Inconsistent with
those furnished him by Mr.. Winslow
and other officials of the company
'.I was not yet fully convinced how
ever" he writes. that the shoe ma
chinery company's policy was unsound
or its methods improper, but so serious
a doubt had been raised in my mind
that I was unwilling to assume respor-
sibility for the company's action
Il therefore concluded, without I'M
derta king to beside definitely whether
the criticisms made were sound or NOT. |
TO quietly retire (withou- raising the |
ouestfonl from the board of directors |
Of which 7 had become 1 member TO |
represent the large stock interests of /
the Henderson family of Chicago. I !
rendered my resignation on December
!. 1906. and it was Immediately accept
ed Subsequently at M-. Winslows
request Mr.. Brandeis declares. he acted
as counsel for the company at confer
snces with Messrs. McEIwaine and
ZONES concerning the leases deemed OBJ
iectionable-
The facts then developed continu-
ID Mr.. Brandeis, land the further CON
sideration given the subject convinced
ne fully that while the policy and
methods of the company had on the
whole. operated benefiC- ally up to that |
.ime they must. if pursued eventually
prove injurious
For three and a half years Mr.. Bran
ieis says he took no art in questions
.elating to the policy of the company
)ut that in the summer of 1910 the sit
ration had entirely changed from what
t was in 1906 through the attitude of
he federal government in connection
With the Standard Oil and tobacco
asses and the alleged intention of the
hoe machinery company Ito ignore or
wade" the act of the Massachusetts,
egislature prohibiting tying clauses n
eases. He was impelled to no longer
emain passive in the shoe controversy