OCR Text |
Show 00 COLLIER EDITOR BEFORE SENATE Mark Sullivan Testifies as to Brandeis' Employment as Counsel for Collier's Weekly in Ballinger- Pinchot Case. Washington, Feb. 24. Mark Sullivan, Sulli-van, editor of Colllor's Weekly, testified testi-fied today before the senate committee commit-tee investigating the nomination of Louis D. Brandeis to tho suprome court that Mr Brandeis was employed by Collier's as attornoy In tho Ballin-ger-Plnchot Investigation "to protect interests and those of the public " Austen G. Fox, attorney for those opposing Mr. Brandeis, had told tho committee that Mr. Brandeis appeared as counsel for L. R. Glavls, a former official of the land office, about whom the charges against -former Secretary Ballinger centered. Mr. Sullivan said Norman Hapgood, the editor of Collier's employed Mr. Brandeis and that no attempt was made to conceal the employment, Mr. Fox asked the committee to subpoena sub-poena Charles E. Kelly, a New York attorney who, he said, he had Information, Informa-tion, had been attorney for Collier's during the Balllnger-Pinchot controversy. contro-versy. Fox said he would show that Mr. Brandeis stated to Kelly he did not wish the fact of his employment by Collier's to be disclosed. Wardlll Catchlngs, formerly of the office of Sullivan and Cromwell, New York lawyers, who represented E. H. Harriman in the fight with Stuyves-ant Stuyves-ant Fish for control of the Illinois Central Cen-tral railroad, told the committee of his visit to Brandeis, Dunbar and Nutter to get proxies for Harriman through Mr Nutter. "I went to Mr. Nutter," said Cachings, Cach-ings, "and told him what we sought. He replied that his firm could not undertake un-dertake thework, except Mr. Brandeis was convinced of the justice of he fight Sullivan and Cromwell were carrying car-rying on, and approved of the employment. employ-ment. For an hour or two I had an Interview with Mr. Brandeis The result re-sult was that the firm of Brandeis, Dunbar and Nutter undertook the work -for us, Mr. Brandeis was to do nothing and did nothing." Under cross-examination Catohlngs said he had to convince Brandeis of the justice of the case and that there was no conflict with other work being done by the firm, particularly the New England merger case. Mr. Catchlngs said Mr. Brandeis sent to Sullivan and Cromwell a copy of a letter to the Massachusetts legislative legis-lative committee In 190S In which he denied he had personally been employed em-ployed by Harriman tor any of his corporations cor-porations and that Sullivan and Cromwell replied It was a correct statemouL It was upon this letter that Mr. Fox based his charges of unprofessional un-professional conduct. 00 |