Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-06-13

never made any contributions to the
Democratic fund.
He also had seen Senator Jones, VINO
was a member OF the Finance Committee
and explained to him the necessity Tor an
al valorem duty. This-was AT the mousse
of Senator Camden, whom the Witness
had known a long time. lie mas sIso
seen Senator Jones at the latter mouse.
lie had said nothing TO MIN ABOUT u'e
Indebtedness OF the Democratic party 10
the Sugar Trust or those Interested In
sucar TefnerIes. mo such indebtedness
exists. and / never alluded TO any III
auy conversation with anybody at any
time" said MIR. Havemeyer.
The witness said he had not seen any
other members of the committee during
his visit TO Washington.
The Chairman: what other senators
did YOU see on this business other IMAM
those you have spoken OF!
Mr.. Havemeyer: | saw Hill
The Chairman: Where did you see MN
and how often?
Mr.. Havemeyer: Al his rooms ana
saw him twice. | saw Brlce, saw Jones.
saw West. saw Cafery.
The Chairman : Any others?
Mr.. Havemeyer: So. | tired TO see
Others. but did not succeed.
Senator Allen: Did you see Senator
White. of Louisiana?
Mr.. Havemeyer: No.
Mr. Allen: Senator German?
Mr.. Havemcyer: German? o. yes, L
saw German twice.
On once occasion Senator Brice sent for
the witness. and he went TO the senator
house, where he met Senator Cahery, ana
they had talk over sugar. The witness
told Mr.. Caftery exactly what he had told
4 IL, . mas ~
advantage OF Louisiana to have the form
of duty al valorem irrespective Of what
the rate was.
"Mr. Caffery told me that he was satis-
fed his people wanted specific rates. That
is about the substance of the conversa-
ton"
The Chairman: Did you have any agree
ment with him. so far as you two were
concerned. so far as any rate OF duty
is concerned?
Mr. Havemeyer: No.-sir. My plea was
that no matter what rate was agreed upon
II might be ad yalorem.
Mr.. Hayemeyer called twice upon Sena-
tor Hill. OF whom he said he told him
he was dominated by other interests at
the moment II think at the first inter-
view he had the Peckham matter in
hand and on the second interview he
had the income-tax on the brain. i felt
that New York senator ought TO be
big enough. besides these side issues. TO
have the interests OF his State In charge;
and my visit was with the intention TO
have him take an active interest in an
industry which was imperllled by congress
sional action"
To none of the senator's had anything
been said about party Indebtedness, sald
Mr.. Havemeyer, and no such obligation
exists. Mr.. Havemeyer said he knew OF
no senator who operated in sugar stock
or who furnished information to lthe
trust about proposed legislation. In an
swer to Senator Allen he said he knew
nothing about whether Senator Brice or
any other senator speculated in sugar
stock The witness said he had never
talked with any Republican members OF
the Finance Committee.
CONTROL OF LEGISLATION.
Senator Allen: You have endeavored
since the organization OF the Sugar Trust
To control congressional legislation upon
the subject Of sugar, have you not?
Mr. Havemeyer: Only by fair means.
which have a right to DO.
Senator Allen And by either coming
TO Washington in person or having some
person to represent you here during the
session of Congress?
Mr. Havemeyer: have never had any
body to represent me. i have always done
that thing in person.
Undoubtedly, that's what l have been
down here for" frankley answered Mr..
Havemeyer, when Senator Allen asked
him whether the first Sugar Trust and
the present one had not endeavored 10
control the legislation Of Congress with
a view to protecting its interests, and
with view to making money out OF
such legfsla tion.
The witness said he had contributed to
the Democratic state campaign fund last
year to the amount-he forgot the exact
figures. lie always contributed TO the
Republican State campaign fund. but ne
could not say he contributed last year
without reference to his books. His re-
collections were that no contributions were
made by him in 1892.
Mr.. Uavemeyer said Contributions TO
local political organizations have always
been made by corporations before the
trust. and by the trust and the American
Sugar-Re efinng Company, and no doubt
Will continue to be. Ii is a very suitable
| and proper thing TO do.
Senator Allen: Why should the Amer-
| can Sugar-Refnng Company contribute
| To either of the political parties Of New
York?
| Alf. fthNeU1tNefs we nave
rests in the State and We want police and
| fire protection. Every individual and cor
poration and firm. trust or whatever you
| call it, does these things. and We do
| them.
Senator Allen And you contribute TO
| both parties with the expectation that
| whatever party succeeds your interests
| will b. guarded?
Mr. Havemeyer: We have a good deal
| of protection for our contributions.
| Senator Allen: Contributions were also
| given 10 the Republican party In Mdssa-
| chusetts?
Mr.. Havemeyer: 1t is my impression
| that wherever there Is dominant party,
| wherever the majority is very large that
| Is the party that gets the contribution,
because that is the party which controls
| local matters.
Senator Alien: Then the Sugar Trust is
! ID mocrat in a Democratic State and
| Republican in a Republican State?
| Mr. Haveineyer: As far as local matters
are concerned. think that is about ii.
| lie would have TO look up where the
contributions went in Pennsylvania and
| New Jersey. He could not give the
| amount contributed by the Sugar Trust
to campaign funds. but, In answer TO
! Senator Allen. he said it did not amount
10 $4,000 Il had MT contributed TO the
| Anti-Snapper fund.
| FULL DATA DESIRED.
Mr. Allen asked for full data as TO
| all money contributed by the American
Sugar Refining Company or any OF It's
officers on its account or In its interest In
| the different States OF the Union in l&-
| and 1898 for the political purposes OF any
| political party, whether national, state
or local The request was granted .py
the committee. and Mr Havemeyer asked
an opportunity TO consult his counsel be-
| fore furnishing the data called for.
Mr.. Cord Meyer was also examined. he
said his OCCUPATION was that of executor
| of mis- fathers last Will" president OF the
Acmc Fertilizing Company, anu mdnasin :
partner OF Cord Meyer & 10. lie hao
no connection with the American sus Il
| Refining Company, except as a STOCK
! holder The estate was stochholder. Ht
| represented the estates stockhoiding, anc
had talked with Senators Smith and 3lGr'
ply. and had told them that the last
! section did not afford sufficient protection
10 the sugar Industry. Mr.. Meyer denied
having been present at any consultation
between members of the Sugar trust ano
senators n the Capitol or anywhere else
The report of MIR. Meyers testimony We
not important The committee VIII inee'