The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-03-11
INVESTIGATING SUGAR TRUSTS.
Henry o. Havemeyer Before the House
Committee on Manufactures.


Committee on Manufactures.
WASHINGTON, March 10--Honry o. Have
meyer, of New York, was the only witness
heard by the House Committee on Manu-
features to day regarding the sugar trust.
Much of what he said was in corroboration
and amplification of the testimony of Wit
ness Parsons, who had been on the stand
during the two previous days. The effect
of trusts, in witness opinion, had been to
make sugar cheaper to the consumer than it
would otherwise have been. Sugar was &c
per pound higher than year ago. but 1t
would have advanced 1c per pound, as it
did i'll London, but for the trust Raw
sugar was also higher now than a year ago.
THE EXPORT TRADE.
Formerly, the witness said, considerable
sugar was exported, but the Treasury OIL
cials had kept reducing the amount Of
drawback to be allowed on imported ma
terialS used in the manufacture of refined
sugar until they had got it down SO low that
the export trade was destroyed.
Question-If all kinds Of sugar were on
the free list could the United States COM
pete with foreign countriesi
Answer-The sugar industry could not
exist without protection because of the
higher price paid TO American labor. Sugar
retiners were Disseminated against under
the present tariff, the ad valorem duty
being greater ON raw than on refined sugar.
Mr.. Mills bill made things even worse.
ASSUMES A TARIFF HEARING.
The investigation at this point assumed
somewhat the nature OF tariff hearing,
and in reply to Representative Brecken-
ridge the witness said that he was discrimi-
mated against in the matter of drawback
when the Treasury Department on Novem-
ber /, 1886, fixed the rate at 2.60.
Question. much does it discrimi-
nate against yout
Answer.-There / draw the line That
would disclose my business to my competi-
tors and would do me more injury than al
lowance of no drawback whatever
Question-Is there any remedy you would
like Congress to provide to protect youi
Answer-The drawback on sugar should
be fixed by Congress and not by the Secre-
tary of the Treasury, who may be an able
man and may not be. We don't want our
the Secretary's chair. We would like to
have it fixed and stable.
THE DRAWBACKS.
The witness further said that the draw
backs had been 2.S1 prior to Nov. /, 1886.
The drawback had formerly been greater
than g 81, but it had been at that rate until
Nov. 1, 1886, ever since John Sherman
swept off the drawback without any con-
sultation whatever with the industry. The
Sugar Refineries Company was union not
combination. There was just as much
competition in the purchase of sugar
now as heretofore. Each company
bought for its own use and no
member of the trust acted as buyer for the
trust generally. If raw sugar was put on
the free list a duty of one-half cent per
pound on refined sugar would place this
country on par with Europe SO far as la
Dor was concerned, and n duty Of three
fourths to one cent per pound would put the
United States on an entire equality with
other countries The witness in his testi-
mony in relation to drawbacks did not in
tend any reflection on the Secretary of the
Treasury, for whom he had high respect,
but he thought no man should have the ar
bitrary power at present vested in the Secre-
tary of the Treasury.