Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1894-08-08
SENATOR'S INNOCENT.
r. aport of the Committee Appointed
to Investigate the Sugar
Trust.

Washington, D. c., Aug. 2.-Senator
Gray, chairman of the sugar investigating
committee presented the report of the
committee to the Senate today and asked
that the committee be discharged The
main report is signed by all the senators
of the committee, but Senators Lodge and
Davis presented q supplemental report
and Senator Allen also presents his own
views on some features of the case. The
report which has the approval of the full
committee reciteS the causes which led
up to the investigation and quotes the
article from the Philadelphia Press, on
which the charges against senators was
based. 1t also rectes the facts which
have been Published already as to the re-
fuSal of the correspondent, Edwards, to
answer questions put by the committee
Secretary Carlisle is eXonerated and the
parts of the article rejecting on him are
declared to be without foundation, Eek
cept that it is fact according to Secre-
tary Carlsles testimony, that he did at
the request of Senator Jones of the
hnance committee draft an amendment
TO the other sugar schedule, Il COPY of
which, as described by Mr. Carlisle, is
attached as an exhibit to the testimony"
The conduct of Mr.. Edwards, says the
report, III publishing specific charges
against public men without having per-
S0nal knowledge of the facts calls for the
serious reprObatiOn of the Senate The
committee also says:
There has been no testimony presented before
your committee, and your committee has been
unable to discover any tending to show, that the
sugar schedule made up, as it then stood in
the proposed amendment to the tariff BILL in
consideration of large or any sums Of money
paid Tor campaign purposes for the Democratic
party. No witness has testified before your com
mttee that such was the fact, and all the emo
cratic members of the finance committee and all
the senators whose names have been mentioned
IN the public press rs especially interested in
protecting the sugar refining industries or in
whose states sugar refneries existed, have under
oatn denied that such the truth or that they
had any knowledge or information as to any
sums of money. large or otherwise, having been
PAID Tor campaign purposes of; the democratic
party by the sugar trust, by those connected
with it. OF by any body, consideration for ia
VoTa bic treatment Of its interests by said party
The committee also reports the SUBJ
stance Of the testimony of the sugar re-
liners as saying that the campaign con-
trlbutiOns were made only to the local
committees and not for the purpose of
influencing national campaigns or for the
purpose of securing or defeating national
legislation. No other testimony has, the
committee says, been offered suggested or
discovered which would tend to support
the statements of Edwards in this re-
gard. Nor is there, they unite in saying,
any evidence in support Of the statement
that either of the MesSrs. Havemeyer
had al interview with President CIeve-
land on a yacht in the summer of 1892
or 1893 in regard to the sugar interests
OF the Hawaiian islands or any other
sugar interests or the policy of the admin
istration in regard to them. ION the con-
trary, 1t has been affirmatively shown"
they say, that the statement is untrue
as to any such interview having oc-
CURED"
1t IS, the committee says shown by the
evidence that one or more officers of the
sugar trust were in Washington and that
they saw several senator's, generally those
representing states in which sugar re.
hnerleS were located, with the view of
influencing legislation but these genIe-
men deny the use Of any improper means
to that end. Both the members of the
trust and of the finance committee denied
that any meeting, took place between
them at the capitol Or elsewhere as was
stated in the Holland letter to have
taken place, and there is no evidence in
support of the statement in this regard.
The committee also unite in saying that
no evidence has been adduced tending to
show improper conduct on the part of
those engaged in the framing of the sugar
schedule in the tariff bill. Though, per-
haps, outside the scope of the duty i'm
posed upon your committee" they say,
they take occasion to strongly deprecate
the importantly and pressure to which
Congress and it's members are subjected
combinations, whose enormous wealth
tends to suggest undue influence and to
create in the public mind demoraIizing
belief in the existence of corrupt politics"
The committee reports in the negative
upon the question whether ANY senator
has been Specializing in sugar stocks dur
ing the consideration of the tariff bill"
AS to the latter branch of the inquiry,
which brought out a Photographic copy
of an order to buy sugar stocks, dated
March and purporting to be signed by
Senator Camden, the committee gives
credence to the denial of Senator Cam
den, and says that BattershaI, whose
testimony was expected to bear up the
inference from the Photographic copy, is
a man of doubtful character Senator
Smith is also exGperated from blame
Summing up, the committee says that
E'no charge or charges have been filed
before them alleging that the action Of
any senator has been corruptly or i'm
properly influenced in the consideration of
the tariff bill. and no attempt has been
made so to influence legislation
Ali the testimony taken by the commit
tee is submitted as q part of the report.