Evening star., 1952-07-17
Union Leaders
Accused in Suit
OF Bribe-Takinq
Fovors to Contractors
Brought Poyoffs to 5,
Ousted OfficiuI Says
By Howord [. Dutkin

Hlgn-ranKlng members or the
AFL Brotherhood of Painters
Decorators. and Paperhangers
here today were charged with ac-
cepting bribes from contractors to
allow them to use non-union labor
and obtain other preferential
treatment.
The charges were contained in
an injunction suit filed by Archie
B. Moore. 1414 Quebec street,
HyattSville, Md, former business
agent of District Council 81 of
the painters union. Nine other
members of the local were listed
with Mr.. Moore as plaintiffs.
Named as defendants were r. c.
Lowry. secretary treasurer of the
council, and four others.
District Judge Alexander Holtz-
off refused to grant a temporary
restraining order tying up the
funds of the union and set July
81 for hearing arguments on the
move for a preliminary injunc-
tion.
Tells Of UndercOver Work.
In the suit, Mr.. Moore described
how he engaged in lone-wolf de-
tective work in an effort to un-
cover the alleged bribe payments.
He said he accepted a portion of
the alleged payments to obtain
evidence and that he kept the
money in separate envelopes
marked with the payment dates.
The suit listed alleged payments
totaling almost $4,000 mainly
during 1851.
On July IA. 1851, the suit
charged Mr.. Lowry offered Mr..
Moore one-third Of $500 as a.
'bribe" to cooperate in special
concessions for a contractor en-
gagged in painting work at the
Parkfairfax Apartments. Va.
According to the suit. from July
Is, 1851. to February l, 1852, Mr..
Moore received evidence of ac-
ceptance of bribes by Mr.. Lowry.
John E. Sullivan, business agent Of
the council, and c. H. Rhodes.
financial secretary of the local, all
of whom were listed among the
defendants.
The suit contended that on July
10, 1851, 500 was paid by Max
Schriber, a painting contractor, to
insure good" painters.
S1OO Payment Cited.
On July 81, the suit said, 500
was received from a Philadelphia
contractor for permission to use
their own men instead of members
of Local 1853 on an oil tank job.
Mr.. Moore charged that on July
"a, 1851. arrangements were made
with the Mente Co., with offices
in Washington, for payment of a
$1,000 to Mr.. Lowry to allow the
firm to spray paint at Forest
Glen Hospital. Maryland. The
spray method takes less time than
brush work.
On August I. it was charged,
Mr.. Moore received $25 from Mr..
Lowry as part of a $50 payment
by Paramount Decorating Co. for
permission to use spray.
Mr.. Moore charged that on Au-
gust II, an envelope containing
$1,000 in cash was handed him
and Mr.. Lowry by a Bob Mente
of the Mente Co., representing the
Forest Glen agreement.
The suit said Mr.. Lowry gave
$4O0 to Mr.. Moore, retained $400
himself and gave 5000 to Mr..
Rhodes.
Dismissed From Union.
Mr.. Moore charged that as a
result of his investigation he was
dismissed from his union post on
the grounds that he violated union
laws against slandering officials
and bringing the union into dis
repute.
The suit declared that a meet
ing of the District council dis
missed the charge made against
Mr.. Lowry. Mr.. Sullivan and Mr..
Rhodes. Mr.. Moore declared that
he and the other plaintiffs have
been barred from holding Office
in the union and ruled ineligible
as delegates to the District coun-
Gil
The suit asks that the defend
ants be enjoined from spending
any union money: be barred from
exercising any control over thel
records of the local; be forbidden
to enter into any agreements with
contractors; from holding any
election or installing new officers.
Other defendants are Ernest
Fontana, president of Local 1853,
and Alfred S. Troutman, PRESIDENT
of the District Council.
N