The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1894-06-14
HE is EXAMINED BY THE SENATE
INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE.
Says He Went to Washington to Work
for the Sugar Refining Interests-De-
nies the Interview With Cleve-
land and Similar Stories.

monv. The doors were closed against
the press, as usual, and the proceed
ings were strictly private, 1t is known,
however, that Mr.. Havemeyer was
subjected to very rigid examination
concerning his visits to Washington
last spring while the tariff bill was in
its formative process in the senate
finance committee and in regard to
his interviews with senators.
Mr.. Havemeyer denied the published
statements upon which the investiga
ton is based, both as to contributions
to campaign funds and the demands
of the trust that it should have pro-
lection in the tariff bill for past favors
MIR. Havemeyer talked quite freely
about his visit to Washington while
the tariff bill was pending before the
finance committee, and he said that he
had talked with several senators in the
interest of the proper protection ofthe
refining interest, among them Sena-
tors Hill. German and Smith. The
two latter, he said, had promised to
help MIN, but Senator Hill has given
him no satisfaction at all. He said the
present tariff bill was an unsatisfac
tory one to the refiners because the
differential of one-eighth of l cent
was not sufficient to afford all the pro
lection which their interest should
have received.
He confesses that he had advocated
the ad valorem system and was gratti-
ed that it had been adopted to the eX-
tent that it was, but even with this
concession he declared the schedule
was far from being satisfactory.
Mr.. Havemeyer denied all knowl-
edge OF speculation in sugar stocl.s by
United States senators. MIR. Have
meyer was asked about the published
statement that he had either on Mr..
E. G. Benedict's yacht or at Green
wich, Conn, been in consultation with
Mr.. Cleveland in 1892, after Mr.. Cleve-
lands nomination to the presidency,
about the sugar interests as affected
by the Hawaiian treaty. To this Mr..
Havemeyer said: "There is rot one
word of truth"
he hlSO UBCldI6u JLldU llO SICll OOL-
sutation had ever occurred at any
time or place. He added that he did
not know Mr.. Cleveland ana had never
seen him. Furthermore he had never
exchanged word with Mr.. Benedict
on the subject of sugar or any other
business matter,
He said he had come to Washington
early iu March after tho tariff bill had
passed through the house with the
hope of getting hearing before the
finance committee, and had gone to
Senator Vest to ask him if it would
not be possible to secure hearing by
the committee. Mr. Vest had said
no, but had agreed to allow him to
explain the sugar question to him
(YesG individually, and he had done
so, meeting Mr., Vest twice, In this in
terview he had opposed any duty on
sugar but said that if there was to be
duty iG should be an ad valorem. He
had represented that a differential oi
oue.quarter of a cent on refined sugar
was indispensable TO the existence OF
the sugar refining interest in this
country. He had not been particular
whether this differential should be ad
valorem or specific, but wanted the
! duty on raw ad valorem. He then eS
planned his interview with Senator
Jones at Senator Camden's rooms and
with Senator Caffrey at Senator
Brice's house. He had talked will
Jones about three quarters of an houl
about the different systems of levyint
duty and about the cost of refining
sugar in this and other countries
He said that he had beer
invited to Senator Brice's house tc
meet Senator Caffery. and when ht
met him merely went over the argu'
ment for an ad valorem duty Mr.
Havemeyer says he had gone to the
capitol with Mr.. Morrill,, but not fol
I the purpose of seeing senator's or rep
lresentatives. I'VE were idling around,
he said, sort of spectators.
Mr.. Havemeyer made some startling
statements toward the close OF his tes
timony. He was asked about the con
tributions of the sugar trust to The
campaign fund of political parties ant
said that the records of the trus
showed that such contributions wer'
made, but that they were made to the
state committee, not to the nationa
committees. ne was dohOu IL biC NOh
tributions of the trust were given tc
both parties in the same state he re
piled "Oh, no."
How do you arrange it?" he wa
asked.
"Well, New York is a Democrat
state, we give to the Democrats, ant
to the Republicans in Massachusetts
We never give to The minority"
Did you contribute to the anti
snappers?n asked Senator Lodge.
ooh, no, AIN quite sure on tina
point, nothing to the anti snappers
Mr.. Havemeyer could not give tn
committee the amounts contribute
by the sugar trust to the different cam
paign funds, but he promised to fur
nish them if he could get them.
Cord Meyer was called after MI
Havemeyer finished. He gave tn
committee little or no information
He had conversed with Senator SmitI
on the subject of sugar and perhap
other senators. He was asked if tn
sugar trust or any of its agents ha
employed any senator or represents
tive as an attorney or in other capacit
during the time the bill was pendin
in either house, and he answered i
the negative. This question was pu
in several forms, but each time al
swered the same way.