New-York tribune., 1921-02-16
Br.iradeIl Wins
Point in Fight
To Obtain Bail
Justice Ford Issues Order
for Prosecution to Show
Why Reasonable Doubt
Should Not Be Recognized
Three Builders Are Freed
indictments in Contempt
Cases Quashed; Bare New
Details of Hettrick Code

0CtdASS UA kECGdGGCh NiUuG
While witnesses at the trial of Johr
I. Hettrick continued to disclose the
operation Of his "code of practice
clearing house for bids in the plumbing
industry Robert F. Brindell, the con,
victed labor leader, gained his first
point yesterday in his fight to get out
on bail pending an appeal for new
trial.
Justice Ford, of the Supreme Court
On application of Martin w. Littleton
counsel for Brindell, issued an order
to show cause why certificate of rea-
sonable doubt should not be granted
so Brindell, who has been sentenced
for from FIVE to ten years in Sing Sing
for extortion.'
Argument on the order will be heard
by Justice Blur tomorrow morEng. II
successful in this move Brindell will
obtain his release from the Tombs or
bail, pending his appeal. If he fails he
probably will go to Sing Sing Friday ia
begin his sentence.
Three Builders Discharged
John A. Philbrick. Joseph Penny and
Wright D. Goss, prominent members of
the Builders Supply Bureau, yesterday
obtained the dismissal of indictments
against them for criminal contempt
The order for dismissal was issued by
Justice McAvoy. The three men had
refused to answer certain questions
put to them by Samuel Untermyer,
chief counsel for the Lockwood com
mittee, on September 80 in the commit
tees investigation of the building in
dustry.
They contended that the answers
might tend to incriminate or degrade
them. In this they were upheld yester-
day by Justice McAvoy, who declared
that nothing short of absolute i'm
munity from prosecution could take the
place of the defendants privilege to
refuse to answer as a constitutional
right.
Anthony Clinchy, estimator for the
Charles N. Darmstadt Company, called
by the prosecution in the Hettrick trial
yesterday, testified that Hettrick re-
fused to wise $4,000 bid for the
company, causing the firm to lose a
valuable contract. Clinchy/said he had
submitted this bid on April 6, 1920, for
& job for the Fred F. French Company
at Forty-first Street and Madison
Avenue.
Hettrick told Clinchy, according to
his testimony, that there was an
"error" in his bid, but declined to say
whether it was $40 or $4,000. The bid
but Hettrick, he said, declined to o. K.
it. AS a result, Clinchy said, the bid
was dropped and the job lost.
Joined Code In 1919
Clinchy said his firm Joined the Het-
trick "code of practice" group Of
plumbers in September, 1919, and paid
the usual $3.50 initiation fee.
Fred Deegan, secretary of Local 463,
United Association of Plumbers and
Steamftters, two delegates of which are
co-defendants with Hettrick, told how
he had met Hettrick in connection with
the "code of practice" scheme and how
his local decided to join Hettrick in en-
forcing the code. The union adopted
s. resolution, he said, as result of
which all members of the master
plumbers association were notified by
the union leaders that the code would
be strictly enforced"
This meant that the journeymen
plumbers reserved the right to refuse
80 work for any master plumber
guilty of unfair trade practices" or
who was not an original bidder"
Under the circum stances it is con-
tended by the prosecution that builders
were forced to accept one of the orig
anal bids and could not ignore them and
ask for others.
Charles Ericsson, who was secretary
OF the Master Plumbers Associatiouin in
1Sle, identified some minutes of the as
sociation showing that the organiza-
tion had adopted the code of practice .ti
on August 6, 1919. A letter identified
by him indicated that the iournevmep
plumbers union had sent out notice
shortly thereafter informing members
OF the Master Plumbers, Association
that the code of practice" would be
strictly enforced.
Not Anxious to Join Code
AS additional proof that the plumbers
union was working in conjunction with
dettrlck to enforce the code of prac-
t'Ce, Vhe prosecution produced the
testimony of Frank J. Scanlon, another
master plumber, who told of meeting
IN Hettrick's office at which William !
Doran, one of the co-defendants with
Hettrick, advised him to join the code
group. "lt's good thing" Scanlon
said Doran told him, "and we're back
ing 1T up" Scanlon said he was not
anxious to join, but decided it would
be best to do so.
Under cross-examination Scanlon
SAID he was told that bids would be
raised under instructions from Het-
For what reasons were bids 70 be
raised" asked Attorney Fallon. for the
when the job belonged to another
plumber" -O'i'0i
What dc you tmean ?'
we were not 10 interfere with zach
others customersR
Wasn't it said at that meeting IN
sar. Hettrick's office that the low bid
der was to get the jo6?"
mo, sir"
The trial will be continued this morn