The Washington times., 1916-02-15
A[LEGE BRANDEIS
BETRAYED TRUST
Hollis Testlties Boston Lawyers
Regard Nominee As mot
Entirely Trustworthy"
Continued from First Page,

NConunueu from tIfbt fake.)
could not do 30, and nsked 70 be ex-
cused from appearing before the COM
senator chiffon. chairman Of the SUBJ
comminec,. was absent today, and
Senator Fletcher. acting In his place
announced that consideration OF the
question Of .spmmoning Mr.. Melien
would be held over for consideration BY
the full committee.
Worked On Both Sides.
Mr.. Bailay's testimony related mostly
TO the connection Of Mr.. Brandeis with
the conduct Of the ,2,OO0,0O0 estate Of
q d. Warren. NJ Boston, which had
been left to his widow and children.
''In the Warren case" said Mr. Bailey,
.BrandeiE had his irm working on both
Sides"
Mr.. Bailey prefaced his REMARKS BY
stating that he and Mr. Brandels had
been students together at Harvard He
said since thon they had been on OPP
posite sides Of several cases. but were
not personally unfriendiy,
g. d, Warren. jr.. Mr. Bailey said.
one Of the benehciarles OF his fathers
viii. was a law partner Of Mr..
Brandeis. Upon the death OF Mr.. War
rem, his property. consisting OF paper
plant In Maine and distributing
agency IN Boston, was conveyed to three
trustees. s. y. Warren, Jr. was one
other. and Mr.. Mason third.
These trustees, he testified, acted for
themeelyes and the other children. one
ca CIV whom Mn @ EDWARD Warren later be-
safd these trustees, following the adj
vice OF Mr., Brandeis, first leased the
property to Mr., Brandeis. and then
i1ssed \ themselves individually. BY
ndsD GD'fssSn SseSe the r.psO,snssv. was ssas M II
both the trustees, who were the les
sors, and two OF the trustees, who were
the lessees. Mrs. Warren was not ono
OF the Iessees.
Allege Improper Transaction.
This transaction. Mr.. Bailey Said, was
undisputed and was matter of legal
record. He charged that Mr.. Brandeis
failed to show q copy Of the lease to
Edward Warren. one Of the benenciaries
under the will, and that he unduly fav-
ored 3, II. Warren, r., who. as lessee.
received from 100000 to s2OO.Oo0 yearly
as compensation for his services
After nineteen ycnrs Mr.. Bailey said,
tho profits Of &. ID. Warren, jr., and
Mr.. Mason had mounted to. about 300
o0. He said that during. litiration he
gun In 1909 IL was alletred this ar,ount
was twice al much as they could fairly
charge for their services
"Onr slain was that Mr.. Brandeis
vas lsvseiy instruinentg in making
them to the bcneiicIaries saving the
plan was fair. He showed more regard
to the personal interest of g. ID. War
ren. r.. than to that Of all the bene-
The witness claimed that the lease
was not fair because Rrnndc's and s. d.
Warren. jr,. knew from existing con-
ditions that Mr.. Warner end Mr Ma
son would get at lcast slcN.M0 year
in profits .from running the concern.
Then these amounts were not In the
shape Of salary. but were rrofits made
by. their conduct OF the business" In
qtIired Senator Fletcher.
Our claim is that man acting ~ a
trustee should onerate for The beat In
terests Of his clients nnd n he made
out q lease e himself. It should be
Senator Fietcher asked Mr.. Bailey
whether there had been auy objection
70 the conduct Of the Warren estate
from 1889 to 1905. Mr.. Bailey said there
had not.
Questioned BY Walsh.
did the mother need any more money
than she was getting7" asked Senator
Walsh.
mo. the old lady had more money
than she wanted"
Was your client, Edward Warren.
Suspicious og Mr. BrandeIs during that
timer Persisted Senator Walsh.
mo. belieye he employed Mr.. Bran
deis to make his WILL"
isn't II q fact that the arrangements
we're known to all parties7" inquired
mo; my client was not informed of
the essential elements" replied Mr..
He explained that Edward Warren
was collector OF Antiquities and art
treasures. and did not know much about
he was a graduate Of Oxford, wasn't
heY' asked Senst tor Walsh.
Yes, replied Mr.. bailey.
Mr: Bailey contended that Warren
snould have been advised by Mr.. Bran
deis to engage other counsel TO protect
ms interests. also that he should have
as 70 whether repairs and additions
snouid be paid for bv the estate or by