The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-08-03
IT SMELLS TO HEAVEN
United States Senator'S i'm the Su-
gar Trust Scandal.
Report of the Investigating Commit
tee Is Moral Indictment of
All Concerned.
SECRET EVIDENCE PUBLIC
Camden, Smith and Quay's Names
Mingled in the Report.
No One Held Culpable, but the Commit
tee Finds that the Trust Got
Just What 1t Wanted.
Special to the Indianapolis Iournal.

Special to the Indianapolis Journal
WASHINGTON, Aug. 2-That United
States Senators have been influential in
manipulating American Sugar Trust shares
on New York Stock Exchange; that they
have traded in the shares on Change CIV
ing orders to buy and sell according to
their knowledge of proposed legislation;
that senatorial hands are begrimmed with
gambling in stocks, and that the tariff
schedule on sugar has been fixed and
fought for, because Senators could make
money out of the same and because the
octopus Sugar Trust could be given an op-
portunity to grind higher profits, out of the
people of the United States; that all this
is true and proven by the investigation of
the sugar investigating committee, few will
doubt after reading the following from the
committees voluminous report made to
the Senate to-day. After rehearsing de-
tails of the evidence adduced at that in
vestigation the report of the committee
concludes with the following clear indict-
ment Of those Senators who have dealt in
sugar and the politicians who took money
from the Sugar Trust for campaign ex-
penses:
1T is a matter of complete Indifference
to the trust what duties are levied on
and a sufficient differential is given in
favor of refined sugar. The Sugar Trust.
by the evidence of it's president and treas
urer, has contributed freely to the State
and city campaign funds of both parties.
and their contributions have been made in
years when national elections were held.
This is thoroughly corrupt form of cam
paign contribution, for such contributions
being given to two opposing parties are
not for the purpose of promoting certain
political principles, but to establish an OBJ
legation TO the giver on the part of which,
ever party comes into power. The trust
does not give to political parties for the
promotion of political principles in which
it believes, but for the protection of its
own interests, appears by the same
testimony.
JUST AS THE TRUST WANTED.
The fact that it gives to both political
parties is sufficient proof of the purposes
of its contributions and of their dangerous
nature. For these reasons the undersigned
have felt 1t important to lay before the
Senate and the country the fact that the
sugar schedule as it now stands is ac-
cording to the testimony, in the form de-
sired by the trust and to point out also
the methods by which the Sugar Trust
reached what it desired and obtained
substantial victory
The supplemental report Of Senator Allen.
OF Nebraska, which was published some
days ago, is also submitted with the re-
port. The supplemental testimony taken by
the committee. but kept secret heretofore.
is submitted with the reports 1t contains
the statements of Albert NJ. Sepe, Emil Gil
laudeau, Senators Camden. Smith and 9TH
CnVN I.
in the office of Carson & Mccartney. of this
city, more or less. and that his purchase of
sugar stock had been largely influenced by
seeing Senator's in the office and by the
common talk that they were dealing in
sugar stock. He said he had seen Senators
Brice, Quay and Smith there frequently.
this spring, but had never heard either of
them give order for sugar stock
He produced letters from Emil Gillaudeau.
of the New York brokerage firm of Wheeler
* Co., the first bearing date June 49, and
reading: Il see. that Smith of New Jersey
that they had not speculated in sugar
stocks. could produce a man. or that is
L know man q do not think he would
so back on them), who was in my office this
morning, that received orders i'm sugar from
both of them, and he has Camden's writ
ten order. | should think that if a Senator
swore falsely it was pretty serious mat
ter DO they swear to these questions under
oath?"
In the next letter. dated June 21, Gillau-
deau says: Il have had a talk with my
friend, and he could not in honor use the
informat ton, the orders and the business
were given to him. 1 think you know the
man. have before me now the written or
der for five hundred shares of sugar to buy
at s9% and s31a or less. under date March
2 and signed by the Senator i'm question
The order from the other Senator (Smith)
was verbal. There is no way that 1 can see
without his direct testimony against these
people, that the information can be used,
and that would be dishonorable and he re-
fused to do it, and 1 applaud him in it.
Could you suggest any way that would
leave him out entirely, so that it could be
used?"
Mr.. Selpe said he understood Samuel Bat
tershall TO be the man referred to by Gill
Gillaudeau, when on ihe stand. said that
Battershall had left with him what purport-
ed to be an order for sugar stock, signed ty
back of much soied envelope, for safe
keeping, but that he (Gillaudeau) at Batter
shalPs request had destroyed it.
SENATOR CAMDENS ORDER.
Edward A Levy, another witness fur
nished the Photographic copy of the order
which read:
Buy me 200 shares of Sugar-at s3st or
less-and 800 shares at S3ls or less
~, n. CAMDEN.
March 3"
Senator Smith, when recalled. and the
him, said that the statement was absolute
ly false and that he did not know Mr.
Battershall and never had given him an
order for the purchase of sugar
The Chairman-Do you recollect any
transaction in Sugar stock since the meet
ing of Congress?
Senator Smith-My impression was that I
bought a thousand shares of sugar along
last January or the 1st of February as
nearly as 1 can recollect. j won't swear
positively that / did buy thousand shares
of sugar, but rather have the impression in
my mind that at that time / did.
Senator Smith added that a friend asked
him 10 buy something of him and he gave
an order for a thousand shares. He did
not know whether it was sugar or not but
thought il was whisky. The question as to
purchase of sugar which Senator Smith
had answered by saying he had not pur-
chased sugar was repeated to him, and he
said he was not so positive about that To
the best OF his recollection he had not
and he could not say whether the Newark
transaction was whisky or sugar" He
never kept an account of his transactions
whisky or sugar and expected an answer.
This testimony was taken yesterday. This
morning, Aug 2, Senator Smith appeared
before the committee and said that he had
ascertained that he had not bought or sold
any sugar certificates during the pending
of the tariff bill in the Senate
Senator Camden, who was recalled, also
said that the signature on the photogra nh