The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-08-08

" lO+Nf ~ ~ aus
tor Gray, chairman of the sugar inves-
tigating committee, presented the report
of the committee TO the senate today
and asked that the committee be dis
charged. The main report is signed by
all the senators of the committee, but
Senators Lodge and Davis present a
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 Philadel-
phia Press on which the charges against
senators We're based. Il also recites the
facts which have been published al
ready as to the refusal Of the correspond
ent. Edwards. to answer queries put By
the committee.
Secretary Carlisle is eXonerated and
the parts OF the article rejecting on him
are declared to be without foundation
except that it is a fact. according to
Secretary CarlisIe's testimony. that he
did at the request Of Senator Jones Of
the finance committee draft an amend
ment to the sugar schedule. a copy of
Allti dS utotllDtl ~ WI III i4oANf -
attached as an exhibit 10 the testimony.
The conduct of Mr. Edwards, says the
report, i'm publishing specific charges
against public men without having per-
sonai 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 COM
mittee has been unable to discover any
tending to show that the sugar schedule
was made up, as it then stood i'm the
proposed amendment to the tariff BILL
in consideration of large or any sums
Of money paid for campaign purposes of
the democratic party. No witness has
testified before your committee that such
was the fact and all the democratic mem
bers Of the finance committee and the
senators whose names have been men
toned i'm the public press as especially
interested in protecting the sugar refining
Industries. or in whose states sugar re-
fineries existed have, under oath, denied
that such was the truth. o. that they
had any knowledge or information as to
any sums of money, large or otherwise
having been paid for campaign purposes
of the democratic party by the sugar
trust by those connected with II. or by
y
treatment Of its interests by said party
Sugar ReHners' Testimony.
The COMMITTEES also reports the sub
stance Of the testimony Of the sugar re-
finers. asserting that campaign eontribu-
tions We're made only 10 the local commit
tees and not for the purpose of iniuenc-
ing national campaigns or for the pur-
pose Of securing or defeating national leg
islation. No other testimony has. the
committee says. been offered. suggested
or discovered which would tend to sup
port the statements Of Edwards i'm this
regard Nor is there they unite In say
ing, any evidence in support Of the state
ment that either OF the Messrs. Have
meyer had an interview with President
Cleveland or a yacht in the summer of
1892 or Of 1898 In regard to the sugar in
terests Of the Hawaiian islands, or any
other sugar interests or the policy of the
administration in regard TO them. ION
the contrary, it has been affirmatlvely
shown" they say, that the statement is
untrue as TO any such interview having
occurred
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 gem
sugar rehneries were located with the
view Of influencing legislation, but these
gentlemen deny the use of any improper
means TO that end. Both the members
Of the trust and Of the finance commit
tee denied that any meeting took place
between them at the capitol or else
where, as was stated i'm the Holland
letter 10 have taken place, and there Is
no evidence i'm support Of the statements
in this regard. The committeeman We're
also united i'm saying that no evidence
has been adduced tending to show inn
proper conduct on the part of those en-
gagged in the framing or the sugar SEIZED
ules i'm the tariff bill.
Though perhaps outside the scope of
the duty imposed upon your committee"
ly deprecate the Importantly and pres
sure to which congress and Its members
are subjected by the representatives OF
great industrial combinations, whose
enormous wealth tends to suggest undue
influence and TO create In the public
mind a demoraliZing belief in the exist
ence Of corruption"
The committee reports i'm the negative
upon the question whether any senator
has been specializing in sugar stock dur
ing the consideration of the tariff bill. p"
As TO the latter branch Of the inquiry,
which brought out a Photographic cop3
Of an order 10 buy sugar stocks, dated
by Senator Camden, the committee gives
credence to the denial OF Senator Cam
den and says that Battershall, whose
evidence was expected to bear up the
inference from the Photographic copy,
was man Of doubtful character. Sena-
tor Smith is also exonerated from blame.
Summing up the committee says that
mo charge or charges have been filed
alleging that the action of any senator
has been corruptly or improperly infiu-
enced in the consideration OF the tariff
bill. and no attempt has been made TO
so influence legislation. All the testi-
mony taken by the committee Is submit
ted as a part OF the report
supplemental Report.
Messrs. Davis and Lodge. republicans.
submitted supplemental report de-
voted entirely to the subject of the In
fiuenee of the sugar trust, so-called, on
the making OF the sugar schedule as It
now stands In the tariff bill. They say
that "no evidence has been submitted
TO the committee which proves that the
sugar schedule was made up In order to
fulfill obligations 10 the sugar trust for
campaign contributions" but they con-
slider IL their duty 70 30 into some de-
tail as to the method employed In making
up the sugsF schedule for which the dem
ocratic m @bers Of the finance commit