Judge FRIEDMAN. Weren't you sitting here in court at the last hearing of distributees the other day? The WITNESS. I was sitting last week, yes; that's right, I was sitting here last week. I had to ask some questions and I was satisfied. I wasn't interested in the case. I simply was waiting for Mr. Bring to get through. Judge FRIEDMAN. What is your occupation? The WITNESS: My occupation, I'm interested in real estate; I'm not a broker. Mr. FLYNN: Your Honor, there's a record being taken in this. The estate is going to have to pay for this irrelevant information. He has been before Judge Cullen on similar matters, you know that. The WITNESS: What? Mr. FLYNN: You know what I mean. The WITNESS: Before Judge Cullen, on similar matters? Mr. FLYNN: Yes. The WITNESS: I know I apeared before Judge Cullen, but not on a similar matter. Judge FOSTER. You may step down. (Examination concluded.) Judge FOSTER. Is there anyone else in court who wants to offer any testimony in this meeting of distributees of Nicholas Hall? (There was no response.) Judge FOSTER. The orphans court of Baltimore City will adjourn this hearing. Senator WATKINS. Mr. Chairman, may I ask this question, is the address given by Shankroff in this statement the same as he gave when he testified here? Senator O'MAHONEY. I don't recall that he gave any address. We can find out from the transcript. I don't believe he gave an address— did he? Mr. DAVIS. Here is the address: 1119 North Calvert Street, Baltimore 2. Senator O'MAHONEY. 1119 North Calvert Street, Baltimore 2, was the address which he gave on page 75 of the transcript; the same address. It is the same address which Mr. Shankroff gave, responding to the questions of Judge Foster in the Nicholas Hall proceedings. This document is supported by the affidavit of Mr. Victor, that the attached exhibits were taken in the orphans court at a meeting of the distributees in the Matter of the Estate of Nicholas Hall, deceased, that they are true copies of the exhibits from records of testimony in said proceedings. Senator WILEY. What was the date of the distribution? Senator O'MAHONEY. The date of the distribution does not appear. This is just an extract of the transcript. Senator WILEY. I notice in the petition that it has been filed, it alleges, January 5, 1935- Senator O'MAHONEY. No; that is another matter. Senator WILEY. Oh. Senator O'MAHONEY. And this is merely to show the manner in which Mr. Shankroff proceeded. As a matter of fact, the chairman offered that to justify his ruling that the testimony of the witness Shankroff was altogether irrelevant and immaterial to this issue. Now, then, there is another matter of great interest here. Under date of May 18, 1956, there was a letter transmitted to me from Mr. H. Paul Rome, chairman of the committee on judiciary of the Bar Association of Baltimore City: Hon. JOSEPH C. O'MAHONEY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR O'MAHONEY: I attended the hearing on May 5, 1956, held by your subcommittee relative to the nomination of Solicitor General Simon E. Sobeloff for associate judge of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. At this hearing I, together with a number of other members of the Bar Association of Baltimore City and the Maryland State Bar Association, urged the immediate confirmation of the nomination of General Sobeloff. At that hearing there appeared one Charles Shankroff in opposition to the confirmation of General Sobeloff. Although Mr. Shankroff did not testify fully, it was obvious that his opposition to the confirmation of General Sobeloff was based on a purported investigation of his own into General Sobeloff's activities in the case involving the receivership of the Baltimore Trust Co. From an article in this morning's Sun paper it appears that Mr. Shankroff has now filed a written complaint opposing the confirmation of General Sobeloff, and I feel that it is my duty to call the attention of your committee to Mr. Shankroff's activities in Baltimore City. At the hearing Mr. Shankroff testified that he had lived in Baltimore since 1941, that he was engaged in the real-estate business on his own behalf, and that he is not a member of the bar. Mr. Shankroff is not, in fact, engaged in the real-estate business and an examination of the land records of Baltimore City from 1940 to date shows that Mr. Shankroff has never purchased or sold any real estate in his own name. The records of the clerk's office of the court of common pleas do not show that a license to operate as a real-estate broker has been issued to him. Mr. Shankroff is known to the clerks of the circuit court and Circuit Court No. 2, which are the two equity courts in Baltimore City, and is also known to the clerk of the orphans court of Baltimore City through which court the estates of deceased persons are administered. These clerks have advised me that Mr. Shankroff is constantly in their office looking through court records and documents in an effort to find the names of persons whom he can contact for the purpose of stirring up litigation. In order to acquaint your committee with his activities, I would like to call your attention to three recent cases in which he appeared and his connection therewith. The case of Safe Deposit and Trust Company of Baltimore, Substituted Trustees Under the Will of Ada Blanche Bordley et al. v. Helen B. Price et al., in the circuit court of Baltimore City (Docket 91A, folio 429, case No. A 32128) was a proceeding in which a bill of complaint was filed on October 23, 1951, for the construction of wills and deeds of trust. On December 11, 1954, Mr. Shankroff filed in the proceedings an agreement, dated March 30, 1953, between himself and Helen Bertogalio, also known as Helen Kelly Bordley, wherein the said Helen Bordley in consideration of information furnished to her by Shankroff agreed to assign over to him one-third of any interest she would have arising out of a claim by her as widow of one of the deceased parties named in the will, a photostat of said agreement being attached hereto, and marked "Exhibit No. 1." The whole text of this letter, which will be made a part of this record, is four pages long and it is accompanied by the document to which reference is made and I want to call the attention of the members of the committee to the resemblance between the signature of Mr. Charles Shankroff on this document [indicating], a photostatic document submitted by the gentleman from the Bar Association of Baltimore City, and the signature of Mr. Shankroff on the statement which, by permission of the chairman of this subcommittee, he filed with the committee. I think it requires no handwriting expert to see that the signatures are identical. Senator WATKINS. I examined them, Mr. Chairman, and I fully agree with the chairman's statement. It is so obvious that no expert testimony is required to establish the fact that the same person wrote both of them. Senator O'MAHONEY. I will state for the record and without reading these various documents, that the language used by Mr. Shankroff in the filings that he made before the courts in Baltimore is not that of a lawyer; the language which is used in the statement filed under his name, by permission of the Chair under date of May 15, 1956, is that of a lawyer. The committee will be able to judge from a comparison of these documents the weight to be given to the statement now filed by Mr. Shankroff. Senator WATKINS. Mr. Chairman, I assume that the Chair is going to place in the record all of the exhibits which accompanied the letter from the Baltimore City Bar Association. Senator O'MAHONEY. Oh, yes; they will all be placed in the record. (The documents referred to are as follows:) Hon. JOSEPH C. O'MAHONEY, THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF BALTIMORE CITY, United States, Washington, D. C. May 18, 1956. DEAR SENATOR O'MAHONEY. I attended the hearing on May 5, 1956, held by your subcommittee relative to the nomination of Solicitor General Simon E. Sobeloff for associate judge of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. At this hearing I, together with a number of other members of the Bar Association of Baltimore City and the Maryland State Bar Association, urged the immediate confirmation of the nomination of General Sobeloff. At that hearing there appeared one Charles Shankroff in opposition to the confirmation of General Sobeloff. Although Mr. Shankroff did not testify fully, it was obvious that his opposition to the confirmation of General Sobeloff was based on a purported investigation of his own into General Sobeloff's activities in the case involving the receivership of the Baltimore Trust Co. From an article in this morning's Sun paper it appears that Mr. Shankroff has now filed a written complaint opposing the confirmation of General Sobeioff, and I feel that it is my duty to call the attention of your committee to Mr. Shankroff's activities in Baltimore City. At the hearing Mr. Shankroff testified that he had lived in Baltimore since 1941, that he was engaged in the real-estate business on his own behalf, and that he is not a member of the bar. Mr. Shankroff is not, in fact, engaged in the real estate business, and an examination of the land records of Baltimore City from 1940 to date shows that Mr. Shankroff has never purchased or sold any real estate in his own name. The records of the clerk's office of the court of common pleas do not show that a license to operate as a real-estate broker has been issued to him. Mr. Shankroff is known to the clerks of the circuit court and circuit court No. 2, which are the two equity courts in Baltimore City, and is also known to the clerk of the Orphans Court of Baltimore City through which court the estates of deceased persons are administered. These clerks have advised me that Mr. Shankroff is constantly in their office looking through court records and documents in an effort to find the names of persons whom he can contact for the purpose of stirring up litigation. In order to acquaint your committee with his activities, I would like to call your attention to three recent cases in which he appeared and his connection therewith. The case of Safe Deposit and Trust Company of Baltimore, Substituted Trustees Under the Will of Ada Blanche Bordley, et al. v. Helen B. Price, et al., in the circuit court of Baltimore City (Docket 91A, folio 429, case No. A 32128) was a proceeding in which a bill of complaint was filed on October 23, 1951, for the construction of wills and deeds of trust. On December 11, 1954, Mr. Shankroff filed in the proceedings an agreement, dated March 30, 1953, between himself and Helen Bertogalio, also known as Helen Kelly Bordley, wherein the said Helen Bordley in consideration of information furnished to her by Shankroff agreed to assign over to him one-third of any interest she would have arising out of a claim by her as widow of one of the deceased parties named in the will, a photostat of said agreement being attached hereto, and marked "Exhibit No. 1." Mrs. Bordley filed a claim to a share in the estate alleging that she was the widow of one of the beneficiaries named in the will, which claim, after a hearing, was disallowed. Mrs. Bordley was represented by Douglas N. Sharretts, a member of the bar of Baltimore City. Mr. Sharretts on April 20, 1955, was permitted by an order of court to strike out his appearance as attorney for Mrs. Bordley. On August 8, 1955, Mr. Shankroff filed a petition with the court on his own behalf and on behalf of Mrs. Bordley asking for a further hearing, which petition was denied on August 9, 1955, by Judge Deeley K. Nice. A photostat of the petition is attached hereto, and marked "Exhibit No. 2." Canton Permanent Building Association No. 1 of Baltimore City v. Albert T. Schaffer and Elizabeth M. Schaffer, his wife, was a proceeding instituted in the circuit court No. 2 of Baltimore City (Docket 59C, folio 34, case No. 13215C) for the sale of mortgaged premises. The property was sold and there was a fund of $2,333.92 in excess of the amount due on the mortgage, subject to other claims. On February 7, 1956, Mr. Shankroff filed in the proceedings an agreement, dated June 12, 1952, between Albert T. Schaffer and Elizabeth M. Schaffer, his wife, wherein the said Schaffers, in consideration of information furnished to them by Shankroff showing that they were entitled to a fund of approximately $2,300, assigned to Shankroff one-third of their interest in said sum. A photostat of the agreement, marked "Exhibit No. 3," is herewith attached. On July 10, 1956, Mr. Shankroff filed a petition in the proceedings requesting the court to set the matter for a hearing to determine his interest in the fund. Photostat of said petition is herewith attached, marked "Exhibit No. 4." After a hearing on this matter, the court on February 16, 1956, passed a decree allowing to the Schaffers the sum of $600 out of the fund and ordered $200 of said sum paid to Charles C. Shankroff. A copy of the decree is herewith attached, "Exhibit No. 5." In the case of Henrietta Jenkins, widow, et al. v. State of Maryland, et al. a bill of complaint was filed on May 23, 1944, for the construction of the residuary clause of a will. This case was instituted in the circuit court No. 2 of Baltimore City (Docket 53A, folio 234, case No. 26490A). On April 4, 1955, Mr. Shankroff filed an assignment and power of attorney, dated February 1, 1955, wherein Frederick Robert Jackson, one of the heirs in the estate, in consideration of information furnished him by Shankroff, agreed to pay Mr. Shankroff one-third of whatever amount he recovered, a photostatic copy of this assignment is hereto attached, marked "Exhibit No. 6." On March 30, 1955, the auditor and master of the circuit court No. 2 of Baltimore City filed his report with the court. To this report Charles Shankroff filed exceptions in which he set out: "1. That he appears, in person, on his own behalf, and on behalf of Frederick Robert Jackson, by reason of an assignment of a one-third interest, from the said Frederick Robert Jackson; also as amicus curiae; also as a duty to the public, first, on behalf of the public-school system of the city of Baltimore; secondly, as a duty to the Treasury of the United States." A copy of these exceptions is herewith attached, marked "Exhibit No. 7." On May 20, 1955, Mr. Shankroff filed additional exceptions to the report of the master, photostat of these additional exceptions is herewith attached, marked "Exhibit No. 8." On May 24, 1955, the trustees filed a motion ne recipiatur, to which motion Mr. Shankroff filed exceptions, photostatic copies of which are herewith attached and marked "Exhibits Nos. 9 and 10." On June 23, 1955, the court, after a hearing, dismissed all of Mr. Shankroff's exceptions and petitions. In view of Mr. Shankroff's activities in Baltimore City, as shown by the enclosed exhibits, and of your own personal knowledge of him gathered from his testimony at the hearing, I respectfully submit that your committee must conclude that Mr. Shankroff's opposition to General Sobeloff's confirmation has no merit. As chairman of the judiciary committee of the Bar Association of Baltimore City and on my own behalf, I again respectfully urge your committee to promptly confirm the nomination of General Sobeloff. Respectfully yours, H. PAUL ROME, Chairman, Committee on Judiciary. EXHIBIT No. 1 AGREEMENT IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED this 30th day of March, 1953, by and between Helen Bertoglio, also known as Ella Kelley Bordley, residing at 101 Dogwood Road, Peekskill, New York, daughter of Thomas Kelley and Winifred Kelley, both deceased, hereinafter designated as party of the first part, and Charles Shankroff, residing at 1119 N. Calvert Street, Baltimore, Maryland, hereinafter designated as the party of the second part, that in consideration of one dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknwoledged by the party of the first part, and in consideration of information furnished to the party of the first part, whereby Helen Bertoglio, also known as Ella Kelley Bordley, party of the first part, is entitled to a fund of approximately $4,000.00 and other funds of which she had no previous knowledge, the party of the first part does hereby irrevocably assign, transfer, and turn over to said Charles Shankroff, party of the second part, one-third of her interest in the net proceeds of any such fund. IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto that if action of a legal nature or litigation shall become necessary so that an attorney must be retained to collect said fund, then two-thirds of the counsel fee shall be paid by the party of the first part and the remaining one-third shall be borne by the party of the second part, provided the attorney of the party of the second part is retained to conduct any and all necessary legal proceedings with regard to said fund. If on the other hand, the party of the first part desires to engage her own attorney to conduct said legal proceedings as may be necessary with respect to said fund then and in that event, the entire counsel fee shall be borne exclusively by the party of the first part without any cost whatsoever to the party of the second part. The said counsel fee must be reasonable and fair. IT IS HEREBY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that if there is no recovery or no funds obtained by the party of the second part, then the party of the first part shall not be obligated to any extent whatsoever to said party of the second part. IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that if an administrator or an executor under a will of a deceased person is to be appointed herein, that this said administrator or executor will waive commissions, insofar as it is within the legal control of the parties hereto to have said fees waived. AS WITNESS our hands and seals the day and year first above written. DOUGLAS N. SHARRETT, JANE E. WORRELL. [Endorsement] Mrs. HELEN BERTOGLIO (L. S.) A 91, 492, 1951, A 32128 SAFE DEPOSIT & TRUST CO., SUB. TRUSTEE, v. HELENA B. PRICE ET AL. Charles Shankroff in person 1119 N. Calvert Street, Baltimore 2, Md. EXHIBIT No. 2 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY SAFE DEPOSIT & TRUST Co. v. HELENA B. PRICE ET AL. Petition of Charles Shankroff, appearing in person, and on behalf of Ella Kelley Bertoglio, a resident of Peekskill, State of New York. To the Honorable the Judge of said Court: POINT I The petition of Charles Shankroff, respectfully shows unto your Honor: 1. On March 31, 1954, Helen Bertoglio, formerly Ella Kelley Bertoglio, assigned to me, a 1⁄4 interest in the fund of $4,000.00, then due her, as the widow of Charles Torrence Bordley, who died June 8, 1933. This assignment was witnessed by Douglas N. Sharretts, Esq., retained by Helen Bertoglio, as her attorney, on the same date. 2. I turned over to Mr. Sharretts all papers showing that Helen Bertoglio was the legitimate widow of Charles Torrence Bordley, and not Agnes F. Bordley, who had filed a claim herein as his widow by her attorney, Simon Nobel Silverberg, Esq. 3. On December 14, 1936, Silverberg & Silverberg, Esqs., attorneys for Agnes F. Bordley, filed an answer in this Court (A6457 A200 1912, In re Trust Estate of |