Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-06-13
THE SUGAR TRUST.
MIR. Havemeyer Before the
Senate Committee.
GAVE BOTH PARTIES FUNDS.
The Trust ri, 0, It's Politi-
cal Co "@s.sh.-
u @ss.s.
Very Little Information O. y by
the committce---Haveme sisit
to Brice's Home-His Talk with
cnTery-Don't Know Grover.
GAVE BOTH PARTIES FUNDS.


Ivy Associated Press.
Washington. June 1e-H. o. Have
meyer, president of che American sugar
refinery has responded to the summons
of Senator Gray's investigation COM
mittee and appeared before the COM
mittee today to give his testimony.
The doors were closed against the press
as usual, and the proceedings were
strictly private. 1t Is known, however.
that MIR. Havemeyer was subjected to
very rigid examination concerning his
visits TO Washington last spring while
the tariff bill was in its formative pro-
cess in the senate finance committee
and in regard to his interviews with
senator's MIR. Havemeyer denied the
published statements upon which the
investigation is based. both as TO con-
tributions to campaign funds and the
demands OF the trust that It should
have protection in the tariff bill for
past favors
Talked with Senators.
Mr., 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 OF the
refining interest, among them Senators
Hin, German and Smith. The two
latter he said had promised TO help
him but Senator Hill has given him no
satisfaction at all. He said the present
tariff bill was an unsatisfactory one to
the refners because the dincrential Of
one-eighth OF a cent was not sufficient
10 afford all the protection which their
Interest should have received. He
confesses that he had advocated the ad
valorem system and was giatifed that
It had been adopted to the extent that
1t was, but even with this concession
he declared the schedule was far from
being satisfactory. Mr.. Havomeyer
denied all knowledge of speculation in
sugar stocks by United States sena-
tons. Mr.. Havemeyer was asked about
the published statement that he had
either, on Mr.. p. g, Benedict's yacht
sultation with Mr. Cleveland or Mr..
BENEDICT In 1892 after Mr. Cleveland's
nomination for the presidency about
the gar interests as affected by the
Hawaiian treaty.
PubIished Statements Denied.
To this Mr.. Havemeyer said; 'Ther1
was not one word of truth" He also
declared that no such consultation had
ever occurred at any time or place,
He added that he did not know MIR,
Cleveland and had never seen him.
| Furthermore he had never exchanged a
word with Mr.. Benedict on the subject
| of sugar or on any other business mat
| ter. He said he had come TO Wash
ingtcn early in March after the tariff
| bill had passed, through the -hope OF
getting a hearing before the finance
committee and had gone TO Senator
| Vest to ask him II II would not be pos
| sible to secure hearing by the COM
| inlttee Mr. Vest had said no. but had
| agteed TO allow him to explain the
| sugar question TO him CVesp indiyid-
| uaily, and he had done so, meeting
| Vest twice. In this interview he had
| opposed any duty on sugar. but said
| that If there was TO he a duty II should
| he on ad valorem. He had represented
| that a differential OF one-quarter Of 4
| cent on refined sugar was indispensable
| TO the existence OF the sugar reilning
| interest In this country. He had not
| been particular whether ms diiteren-
| tiaI should be ad valorem or specific,
but wanted the duty on raw sugar ad
| vnlorem.
| Contributed TO both Parties.
He then explained bis interview with
Senator Jones at Senator Camden's
rooms. and with Senator Canery at
Senator Brice's mouse. He hal talked
| with Jones about three-quarters OF an
hour about the different systems Of
leyying duty and about the cost OF re-
| nuing sugar In this and other countries,
| He said that he had been invited to
| senator nrice's house to meet Senator
| Caffery and when he met him merely
went over the argument for an al va
| loren duty. MIR. Havemeyer SAID ne
| had gone 10 the capitol with Mr., Nor
| rlil. but not for the purpose OF seeing
senators or representatives,.
| I'VE were idling around, he said,
"aart Of spectators" Mr. Havcmeyer
made some rather startling statements
j toward the close Of his testimony ne
was asked about the contributions 81
| tba sugar trust 10 the campaign funds
- ,,oii,fcal parties and said that the
| records Of the trust showed that such
| contributions were made. but that they
| were made to the state committee, not
| "a the national committees. He Wa
| asked II the contributions OF the trust
were given TO both parties In the same
state; he replied: oh. no.
The Amounts Not known.
.How do you arrange ~" he was
asked.
well New York IS a Democratic
state: we give to the Democrats and to
the Republicans In Massachusetts We
never give to the minority"
.Did you contribute to the anti
snappersg'' asked Senator Lodge.
.oh no. 1 am quite sure on thai
mint. nothing to the anti-snappers."
afr Hevemeyer could not give the
.omn.ttee the amounts contributed BY
the sugar trust 20 the different cam
- them n he c0uid get them.
Cord Neyer was called after Rave
.,-,,ar finished He gave the commit
~ lttle or no Information he nae
i w. =. 81 with SENATOR Smith on NC