Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-01-28
Openly Attacked by uttIefield
Before House Committee.
CONCERNS SHERMAN LAW
Motives in Advocating Favorable
Report on Amendments Questioned.
INSIDE ON SHOE MACHINERY
Workings Of United Company Re-
garding Royalties Show
Enormous Profits.

1HO uUuVeS OF LOUIE ~. 6r6nQc1S OF
Boston In advocating . favorable report
Of the Lenrost-La Toilette amendments
to the Sherman antitrust law were at
tackled by former Representative Charles
Littlefeld OF Maine at the conclusion Of
hearing before the House judiciary
committee yesterday afternoon. Mr.. Lit
tlefeld. appearing as counsel for the
United Shoe Machinery Company Of Bos-
ton, waited until Mr.. Brandeis had con-
Quoted the testimony and arguments OF
shoe manufacturers against the United
Company and then took five minutes to
reply.
He pointed out that Mr. Brandeis had
been stakeholder, q director and a
member Of the corporations counsel for
several years. In such capacities, said
Mr.. Littlefield. Mr.. Brandeis had ap-
proved tho methods Of the company
which yesterday he criticised. His in
situation was that Mr.. Brandeis had
changed his views after leaving tho d.
rectorate.
Mr.. Brandeis admitted that what had
been said was true and declared he had
been party to the operations of the
company until 1907.
Policy Changed Later.
1.-The policy Of the company to that
time was eminently proper in my opin-
ion." said Mr.. Brandeis. Later it
changed and has. in my opinion. work
ed great injury to the community.
When discovered that promises made
by the officials OF the company were not
lived up to I satisfied my own con-
science by resigning and I have no
other motive in my conduct now than
to correct evils as see them to exist"
The hearing was devoted to attacks on
the United Shoe Machinery Company. un-
til the Observation-Disclosures incident and a
difference Of opinion between Charles H.
Jones. president Of the Commonwealth
Shoe and Leather Company Of Boston.
and Representative Weeks Of Massachu-
sets plunged the whole committee into
discussion Of what should remain In
the record. In his statement against the
manufacturers who opposed its policies
were liable to punishment. He said he
had been forced to resign as q director
Of the First National Bank Of Boston
because he had crttised the United
Shoe Machinery Company.
MI. Weeks. who is here. ID the vice
president of that bank and knows Of
this incident" said Mr.. Jones.
His Resignation Asked For.
Mr. Weeks. referring to that statement,
said Mr.. Jones had been one Of the
banks directors. In the directorate, he
said. were two representatives Of the
New Haven railroad and three from tho
United Shoe Machinery Company. An
alteration between Mr.. Jones and the
New Haven railroad and the machinery
company because of criticism he directed
against them. Mr. Weeks explained. had
caused the other twenty directors to
ask for Mr.. Jones' resignation, for the
sake Of harmony and efficiency.
Mr. Jones said the royalty paid for the
machines used in his factory amounted
to 81 cents on each pair Of shoes. On
. machine which cost $50 to build, he
said. was leased by the United Shoe Ma
chinery Company on q royalty OF cents
q pair for shoes put through It This
machine would make twenty dozen pairs
OF shoes Q day and last for ten or twelve
years. The shoe machinery company
would get 81, 500 year out Of the ma
chine, he said
He declared that he had been paying
royalties aggregating 100000 q year for
many years and that the United Shoe
Machinery Company divides tho profit OF
shoe manufacture with the men who
actually make tho shoes.
Charles X. Fo1 OF Haverh1ll. Mass. and
+. G. Rand Of St Louis. shoe manufac-
turerB, were also witnesses. The COM
mittee win resume hearings On the trust
bills February 18.