The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1894-06-18

gar. The witness told Mr. Caffery exactly
what he haG told to the other senators,
and, also. that it was to the advantage Of
Louisiana to have the form of duty ad
valorem, irrespective of what the rate vase
Mr.. Caffery told me that he was satisfied
his people wanted pacific rates. That is
about the substance of the conversation.
The Chairman-Did you have any agree
ment with him SO far as you two were
concerned, as to any rate Of schedule, ad
valoreE, or specific?
Mr.. Havemeyer--No sir. My plea was
that no matter what the rate was agreed
upon, it ought to be under the ad valorem
system.
That was the only occasion, he said,
when he had met any senator at Mr..
Bricc's house.
Senator Alen-You have endeavored since
the organization Of the sugar trust to con-
troll congressional legislation upon the SUBJ
ject of sugar, have you not?
MI HavemeNer-Only by fair means
which have a right to do.
Senator Allen-And by either coming to
Washington in person or having some per-
son to represent you here during the SEES
sion of congress?
Mr.. Havemeyer-I have never had any
body to represent me. 1 have always done
that thing in person.
Contributed to Campaign Funds.
Undoubtedly that's what 1 have been
down here for, frankly answered Have
meyer when Senator Allen asked him
whether the first sugar trust and the pres
ent one had not endeavored to control legis-
laton of congress with a view to protect
ing it's interests and with view to making
money out of such legislation. The witness
said he had contributed to the democratic
state campaign fund last year to moder-
ate amount-he forgot the exact figures. He
always contributed to the republican state
I'm he hat
he contributed to it last year without re-
freShing his memory. His recollection was
that no contributions were made by him
in 1892
Mr.. Havemeyer said: contributions to
local political organizations have always
been made by corporations before the
trust, and by the trust and the American
Sugar Refining Company, and no doubt will
continue to be. 1t is Il very suitable and
proper thing to do"
Senator Allen-Why should the American
Sugar Refining Company contribute to eth
err Of the political parties in the state of
New York.
Mr. Havemeyer-We have large interests
in the state; want police
protection and fire protection. We
need everything that the city furnishes
and gives and they have to support these
things Every individual and corporation
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 of whichever
party succeeds your interests will be
guarded
Mr. Havemeyer-We have a good deal OF
protection for our contribution.
Senator A1en-Contributions were also
given 20 the republican party in Massachu-
sets?
Mr.. Havemeyer-It is my impression that
wherever there is a dominant party, wher-
ever the party is very large, that is the
party that gets the contribution, because
that is the party which controls the local
matters.
Senator Allen-Ther the sugar. trust is
democrat in democratic state and a re-
publican in republican state?
Mr.. Havemeyer-As far as local matters
are concerned, [ think that is about it.
He would have to look up where contri-
buttons went in Pennsylvania and New
Jersey. He could not give the amount con-
tributed by the sugar trust to campaign
funds, but, in answer to Senator Allen, he
said it did not amount to 100000. 1t had not
contributed to the anti-snapper fund.
Mr.. Allen asked for full data as to all
money contributed by the American Sugar
Refining Company or any OF it's officers in
its account or in it's interest in the different
states of the union. in 1882 and 1895, for po-
HticaI purposes Of any political party
whether national, state or local.
The requst granted by the committee
and Mr.. Havemeyer asked an opportunity
to consult his counsel before furnishing the
data called for.
Mr.. Cordmeyer was also examined. He
said his occupation was executor of his
fathers last WILL" president of the Acme
Fertlizing Company, and managing partner
of Cordmeyer & Co. He had no connection
with the American Sugar Refining Company
except as a Stockholder. The estate was a
Stockholder. He represented the estates
stockholding interest and had talked with
Senators Smith and Murphy and had told
them that the last section did not afford
sufficient protection to the sugar industry.
Mr.. Cordmeyer denied having been present
at anY consultation between members OF
the sugar trust and senators in the capitol
or anywhere else. The rest of MIR. Cord
meyers testimony was not important. The
committee will meet tomorrow.
Havemeyer called twice upon Senator
Hill. of whom he said Hill told him he was
dominated by other interests at the mo-
mpnt Il think at the first interview ne
had the Peckham matter in hand, and on
the second interview he had the income tax
on the brain. l felt that a New York SEN
ator ought to be big enough BESIDES theSe
side issues to have the interests OF MS state
in charge and my visit was with the mten-
tion to have him take an active interest III
an industry which was Imperfect by con-
gressional action.