The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-03-10
SUGAR TRUST INVESTIGATION.
The Great Combine Gets n shaking VI
I'm the Committee Hearing.

SsUh9 hhsSs HNsSShs1AhsVNs
The Great Combine Gets shaking Up
in the Committee Hearing.
WASHINGTON, March 0.-The investiga-
ton into the sugar trust was resumed by
the House committee on manufactures
this morning, Mr.. Parsons, the attorney
for the trust, again being placed OH the
stand. Chairman Bacon examined the
witness in regard TO whether any changes
had been made in the agreement since II
was entered into, to which answer was
made that the deed had not been changed,
but that IL had since been required that
instead Of new reiineries being admitted
by the action OF the board, tho consent Of
a majority Of the certificate holders should
be obtained.
Representative Hopkins asked whether
the price Of sugar had been increased by
the creation OF this 80 called trust, and
witness answered: Sin my opinion, the
price Of sugar has not been increased, rs
| the result OF this arrangement"
To Representative Breckenridge the wit
ness said that no sugar reflnerics had been
purchased by the board but that members
OF the association had, since the formation
OF the trust, purchased the entire stock OF
re6norics in which they had not previously
been Interested.
Representative Breckenridge asked why
they had not taken the stockholders into
the trust instead OF buying the stock.
Witness replied that the number OF trus'
tees was limited by agreement 10 eleven,
that all persons holding stock were salts.
fled TO have the gentlemen constituting
the board represent, and that large num-
Der OF persons having control would make
the board unmanageable.
Mr.. Parsons stated that the stock OF nc
lincries purchased by members 81 tn,
board since the formation OF tho trust has
been acquired by the transfer from larry,
number Of stockholders, but that II had all
been purchased at one transaction.
Chairman Bacon then called witness
attention 10 the decision announced by In,
committee yesterday that II would insis,
upon the amount OF certificates at which
each company entered into the agreement
being given and tho witness thereupoi
stated.
''The matter has been considered sine
adjournment and the situation Is this
do not own that deed. have no contrN
Of that deed. II Is the property Of III
board como here with authority 10 fui
nish copy complete with the exception
OF the distribution Of certificates. hav
no authority Ia furnish that distribution
hope that the committee will be satiailc,
20 take the deed In the foru
in which Il exists without rails
ing any further question and 10
this reason. while Il IL the desire Of al
parties 10 furnish any information whicl
bears upon legislation, there arc larg
private interests which might DO hurt b
an inquiry into matters which We rcgar'
az purely private. These relneries difici
In strength, importance and credit and !
might easily be that differences might b,
drawn II these amounts were given which
might bo seriously injurious. am yer,
well satisfied that the committee would no
wish TO be even innocently the inalrumen
Of harm 10 any Of them"
The committee then went into cxecutiv,
session 10 consider the matter, flint grant
ing Mr.. Parsons permission 10 make
statement after the reporters had been ex
cludcd. When the doors were reopcnc'
Chairman Bacon announced that the com
mitteo had decided that II would not e.
the present insist upon an answer 10 th
question.
In answer 10 n question, witness sal
that the aggregation OF capital and the con
ccntration Of the business, he believed
would cheaper sugar, give fair profits /
the manufacturers aud admit " highe
Wages being paid. the labopn. In thcs
rchncries tho laborn today were pal
higher prices than Was ever before paid "a
such work, and the only thing that coul
lower Wages would be injurious lcgislS
ton.
Witness was asked n this aggregation Q
wealth did not create monopolies aud
monopolies did no tend 10 incrcaAe prices
lie said that such would bo tho chs
where the government gfantod a monoT
oily. but that u wns otherwise general
impossible, and peculiarly 10 In the CHS
, Of sugar, because the slightest advanc
would bring In foreign sugar., would temp
! the erection OF new rcilncries and the "a
, largcment Of existing ones, not parties
the agreement
Mr. IIcunann--In view Of the I'm
mcnsity Of this vast trust association, wi
J II not in the end tend 10 produce an aQRr'
cation Of runncrica In other countries, an
! finally wipe out all competition aud Great
such a monopoly that Il will DO imposaib
10 beat il7
! Mr.. Parsons did not believe such thin
/. possible, and said no had fully answerc
4 The question In argument before the Ne
y York stats senate judiciary committee.
/ Mr.. smith inquired how the conccniri
!. ton Of this particular branch Of manuia'
/ turing In iho hands Of few benefited L
4 b0rera.
! The witness said: "Becausc the moi
r sugar they can sell the more laboren the
a require"
n Mr. smlth-All my experience goes
4 show the reverse. As understood yo'
}. remarks, You said that by the conccnir
ton Of thesc several manufactured II
!, members Of this trust look 10 u That all J
/ members arc supplied with the beet m
4 chincry. Now u Il not a fact that wh'
Q such appliances are made labor Is mo
4 dispensed WITH
h Mr.. Parsons--No, not nj ALL That Is N
Il the experience Of manufacturing In m
: part OF ihc world. Moro persons aro en-
|. ploycd In manufacturing under tho II
q proyement which exports today than
any previous tune.
> 81. smith produced q roar Of Taught
Il when no rel0rted: Then my esisien
here "a human being Is mistake"
70 John w. Dojsworth, managing editor
!, the New York topmTcidl Bulisib,, tcstifi
q that fumom Ia regard " this trust began