Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1893-02-14
PUTS IN A PROTEST.
The Whisky Trust Objects to
Congressional lnquisition.
AND DIsowNs DEwAR AND GIBSON


Greenhut Explains the Operations OF the
Company and How 1t Differs from
E -Cleveland's Friend Quincy Drops
in to Inquire What Show There Is for .
Sherman Act Repeal Bill-what He
Discovered-HawaiI and the Sugar
Bounty-Capitai City Items.
WASHINGTON, Feb. l4-The whisky trust
investigation was continued yesterday,
President Greenhut, of the Distillng and
Cattle-Feeding company, being examined
Before Greenhut took the stand Stevens,
the attorney for the company, asked per-
mission to make a statement. He wished
TO enter protest against an inquiry into
the affairs of the Distilling and Cattle
Feeding company. The company was a
corporation under the laws of Illinois 1t
was manufacturing company and au-
thorized to sell its products as other COM
panies do. Ii was not engaged in any I'M
lawful business. Its methods of doing
business differed from other companies so
far as rebate vouchers used by it was con-
cerned.
Has Nothing to DO with Dewar.
These vouchers would be shown by the
president of the company They were pay
able under agreement He wished to dis
claim any and all connection of the COM
many with DeWar's testimony The Off
GERS had no knowledge whatever regarding
IT. Whatever there was between DeWar
and Gibson was under a former company
and neither of the gentlemen DeWar nor
Glbson) had ever been connected with the
present company. This company took no
Interest in the matter at all. Gibson had
resigned when this company was formed
Gibson, he understood, discharged DeWar.
de could not see the right of the commit
Tee to go into the affairs of the company.
Greenhut on the Stand.
Greenhut testified that he had been pres
ident of the Distlling and Cattle Feeding
company since its organization. Its stock
was S35, O00,0OO. 1t originally had eighty
two distilleries. They were located In Chi
cago, Cincinnati, Peoria, milwaukee,. St.
Paul, Omaha and other places. They were
all bought by the corporation at the time
of its organization.
Bynum asked how the values of the
plants were obtained and how they were
paid for.
Greenhut objected 10 answering the
question as it went into the financial af-
fairs of the company, and then stated that
and paid for in stock of the company. A
number of the plants were afterward closed,
as the demand for the product was not
sufficient TO keep them running.
The Matter of Rebates.
The company had no agents, their sales
being made direct to wholesale dealers. A
rebate was given to customers provided
their dealing with the company was con-
tinuous for six months, the period covered
by the rebate vouchers. His company
marketed pure spirits, the blending and
adulteration being done by wholesale
dealers and other purchasers. In reply to
questions by Boatner, he said that his COM
pany was not trust. He knew of no
trusts. A trust, as he understood it, con-
sisted in the cooperation of different in
dividuals or corporations to limit pro-
duction and keep up prices. His company
put their goods to the trade at less cost;
this was one of their objects.
Cause of the Rise of Price.
Boatner said that it had been stated be-
fore the committee that the price of whisky
had advanced 25 cents a gallon when a
large amount of these vouchers were out.
The reply was that at the time of the adj
vance no more than usual were out. The
price had risen on account of the agitation
the internal revenue tax on liquors. 1t was
an excessive and speculative demand and
the company had advanced the price to
stop it. If they had not done so they could
have sold twice the amount of goods they
did. His company had nothing to do with
the supply or manufacture of compounds
or essences used in the adulteration OF
liquors. The addition of essences did not
injure whisky; it was simply to cater to the
tastes of the trade.
How 1t Differed from a Trust.
Boatner asked him if his company was
not the successor of what was known as
the whisky trust. Witness replied yes
and Boatner asked what the difference in
the companies was Greenhut replied
that the distillers who were organized as
trust were separate and under board Of
trustees who. issued trust certificates
They had stock in the trust and could con
troll the election of officers and the affairs
of the concern. Its object was to prevent
over-production. The plants were not al
lowed to produce any more than could bt
sold. He was president of the old company
The new company absolutely owns all thu
property it controls. The committee ad
journed.
QUINCY LOOKS OVER THE GROUND
He Goes to Washington to See Abou
sherman Act Repeal.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 14-Josiah Quinc
arrived in Washington yesterday and ha
talk with several Democrats in congress
ON the situation. There were some inauiI
les as to whether or not Quincy bore an
message from Cleveland. Chairman Bacon
of the banking committee which ha
charge of the recent attempt to repeal th
Sherman bullion purchase, saw Quincy
but said that if that gentleman bore an
message from the president elect it was nc
delivered to him (Bacon).
Not an Envoy from Cleveland.
Quincy himself said: al had no authorit
to speak for Mr.. Cleveland upon this sui
ject and my visit was not due to Mr.. Clev
lands suggestion. So far as | am awaI