◆ SpookStack

-@ @ Memorandum for the Director. -S- July 25, 1936 The files regarding the investigation of the case entitled *TEESFUR DRESSING INVESTIGATION, ANTITRUST" reflect that the investiga~ tion was predicated upon a complaint received from the VAN-DYE-WAY CORPORATION, located at 465 Straight Street, Paterson, New Jersey, on December 8, 1931, against the KAMACHATKA FUR DYEING CORPORATICN; THE ICELAND FUR DYEING CO.; THEE PEILIP SINGER & BRO.; THE GREAT NORTRERN FUR DYEING & DRESSING CO.; and THE MENDOZA FUR DYEING WORKS, INC., all of New York City. The complainant and the five corporations complained of are competitors in the business of dyeing rabbit skins; that their customers are jobbers who deal in rabbit skins, buying them in a raw state, sending them to the dyers for dyeing, and then selling them in a dressed condition to clothing manufacturers. The complaint made was that these five corporations notified the jobbers in attendance that unless all of their dyeing work was given to one of the said five corporations no credit would be extended to them and that if they gave any. work whatever to the complainant, not only would no credit be extended to them, but none of their work would be accepted. Through the investigation of this complaint is information obtained that a great number of the concerns in this industry were doing the same thing and also hiring gangsters to establish their strong-arm tactics. As a result of these investigations a United States Grand Jury in the Southern District of New York returned two indictments on November 6, 1933, against a large number of business firms and individuals, together with two labor unions of this industry, charging them with a violation of the antitrust laws, in that by their agreements and tactics they were acting in restraint of interstate commerce. Bench warrants were issued for all defendants on November 9, 1955, Louis Buckhalter was made a defendant in both indictments and on November 22, 1933, he appeared before United States District Judge Robert A. Inch, and was arraigned, Buckhalter pleading not guilty on both indictments, his bail being set for $2500.00 and $5,000.00, respectively. On June 11, 1954, Buckhalter was called before Judge William Bondy and was requested to give a new bail, there being a quer*ion es to the old one, and at this time his bail was reduced in the FUR DRESSERS FACTOR CORPORATION, et al case to $3,000.00. Included in the terms of the bail bonds was a prohibition against leaving the jurisdiction without the permission of the court. The Bureau was informed by letter on August 5, 1935 that there had appeared articles