The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1920-12-11

Donnelly antitrust law. prohibiting any
combination or arrangement whereby
competition may be restrained.
Most OF these concerns have been es-
tablished here from forty to sixty years
All OF them have borne an honorable
reputation throughout their careers
Under these circumstances 1t is due both
to the public and to these business men
that brief statement be made of the
circumstances under which they find
themselves In conflict with the law
Unlike the granite trade. the cutting
OF limestone and marble is done In and
about the city of New York instead of
at the distant quarries. This requires
the maintenance of large yards within
the metropolitan area, extensive machin-
cry plants and the performance of work
under union labor conditions, all of
which make the business a costly one
to conduct.
by 1912 the condition Of the business
had become extremely serious. This was
due In part to the competition of cheap
artificial stone and terra Gotta and In
part to the fact that greet excess of
plant opacity had been developed by the
seventy-five or more concerns In the cut
stone business. thus leading to cutthroat
competition and taking on work under
Bankruptcy was staring many of the
trade In the face. More than twenty
concerns gave UP the struggle and went
out OF business. In this situation n
group OF the leading concerns got to-
gether and conferred as to ways and
means OF saving their business. They
sought legal advice and were advised
that the law did not exact ruinous COM
petition and that there was a perfectly
legal method by which those who wished
to do 30 might cooperate In a fair diyi-
sion Of the work for which they were
contending with one another. The
method advised did not contemplate
price fixing.
I'm entering into this arrangement.
into which they were driven by labor
conditions and failing business. the
whole purpose of these contractors was
to keep their heads above water and
maintain business which was threat
ened with destruction. There has been
no profiteering or anything approach
ing 1t. l have examined their reports
and not one shows a net profit for the
period of the last five years.
My clients have no desire to dodge
or hide the facts. however unpleasant.
They have testified frankly, produced
their books and papers and have gone
before the Grand Jury, wQiving i'm
munity. If 1t turns out that they have
violated law that has seldom been
enforced they will face the conse-
Quences. In any event, they did only
what larger interests have done for a
generation with impunity land at every
stage of the matter acted upon legal
advice which they believed to be sound
and competent"
Henry Hanlein, who was one OF the
defendants to appear and plead, is the
contractor who made the lone bid for
the contract to supply the city with
limestone for the new Court House,
which contract was quickly cancelled by
the Mayor following the first revelations
of the Lockwood committee.
With the addition of these defendants
the total now indicted as a result Of the
committees proceedings is increased to
at least fifty-four. This cures does not
take into account the Indictment, which
was not made public.
At the time of the arraignment of
Goss George z. Madalie and Martin
Conboy. attorneys for the indicted men,
bers of the Builders Supply Bureau,
argued a motion for leave to inspect the
minutes OF the Extraordinary Grand
Jury relating to the indictment of Penny
and Philbrick.. Justice McAvoy re-
served decision upon this APPLICATION.