Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-06-17

me his friend raid II was all a myth, all
nothing. and not to give myself any con-
| cern about II. This correspondent asked
me the name Of that person. and told
him II was given to mo In confidence.
and had no right 10 give the name
without Captain Barncs's consent, but
hae no objection 10 giving the name to
the committee. have seen Mr.. Rowland
about IT, just this minute sent for him
and told him that should ask the COM
mittee 20 summon him to give the ac-
count Of his interview with me to you"
The chairman: Had you any knowledge
whatever until this interview with Mr..
Rowland. on the evening you speak OF, OF
| the bets OF your son with this broker In
sugar and cotton?
Senator Ransom: ! never dreamed OF
| such a thing. would not have believed
II. The truth OF IL is. / went TO my son
with great deal OF confidence when this
correspondent wanted 20 see him. The
paper shows that when he bought the
first stock I was out OF the city. The 18th
OF April was when we were at Governor
Vance's funeral. at Asheville. j may
state TO the committee that have no in
torest whatever. and never have had IN any
stock. or trade. or anything else In any
since 1 have been In the Senate.
QUAY.
While Senator Quay admitted having
| spccuiated. he answered all the other
| questions In the negative.
Mr.. Quay's evidence was short and TO
| the point. He was examined by Senator
| Lodge. who asked: ''Have you bought or
| sold. directly or indirectly, since the be-
ginning OF this session of Congress. any
| so-callcd sugar stock or stocks. or stock
or certificates OF the American Sugar
Refining Company
Mr. Quay: have. I have bought and
sold. not continuously. but incidentally
with other stocks. stocks OF the Ameri-
can Sugar Refining Company during the
| last twenty months. beginning say
| twenty months ago. The last transaction.
7 think. was on the day that was fixed
| for the vote upon the sugar schedule.
when | closed out. ut some loss. TO en-
able me to vote without having any in
terest in the stock. j had been away
week. and did not know the schedule
was about 20 be voted upon. ] have done
nothing in II since. | do not feel that
| there is anything In my connection with
| the Senate to interfere with my buying
| or selling the stock when / please, and l
propose TO do SO.
Mr. Lodge: Have you, at any time. been
connected with the American Sugar-Re-
| nning Company. or have you at any time
been IN It's employ, as attorney, agent,
or otherwise?
Mr. Quay; I have not, and / will say
further, inasmuch as / have testified that
/ have dealt In that stock. that l have
| no acquaintance with either Of the Have
meyers, or Mr.. Searles. or Mr.. Terrell,
and have never met any one al Washing
ton or elsewhere who was understood 10
be an agent of the Sugar Trust. or con-
nectod with it; that ! have never re-
ceived Information from any member of
the Senate Finance Committee in rela-
ton 10 legislation. I have acted entirely
I'm all the sales or purchases / have made
without regard to pending legislation.
Senator Davis: MIR. Quay, let me ask
you a question. You have been in the
practice for years haven't you. of ope-
rating in various stocks upon the Stock
Board, more or less?
Mr. Quay: Yes. sir; since 1861. Some
times for two or three years do not buy
sugar stocks: sometimes | am very ac-
tive | simply have nothing at all TO ex-
plain, except that / have no relation what
ever with the Sugar Trust. and had no
participation in the framing OF the sugar
schedule. or I'm any legislation upon it.
MIR. Davis: You were not consulted
about f.?
Mr.. Quay: No. sir.
Mr.. Davis: BY the sugar people?
Mr.. Quay: | am not acquainted with
them. and never knew any Of them. That
is probably a pretty broad assertion |
am very well acquainted with Mr.. Har-
rison. OF Philadelphia, who was the pro-
prietor Of refinery there which went
into the trust and he might possibly be
in It ". | am not. sure about IT. But
| have never conversed with him in re-
ference 10 the Sugar Trust.
Mr.. Davis You had nothing 10 do with
making up the sugar schedule?
Mr.. quay: No, sir.
VEST.
The testimony of Senator Vest was i'm |
portant in showing how the sugar sche- /
dulc WIS finally arranged. He answered |
all the categorical questions in the mega
tive and was asked by Senator Lodge |
what no meant by the statement in his |
previous testimony that the duty put on |
sugar was put in because the witness |
could not help himself After some eX- |
PLANTATION about Democratic senators in |
sisting on adj valorem duties, Senator Vest |
was asked 10 tell the names OF the sena- |
tors who so insisted. He said he had no |
personal reason for not giving names. but |
il was against the rules of the Senate for |
him 10 tell what occurred In the Finance |
Committee, and he therefore asked Seha, |
tor Lodge what he should do in thernat- |
ter. The committee decided that Mr..
Vest should tell. and he answered:
The first bill prepared by Senator !
Jones. Senator Mills. and myself put |
about 1 cent specific duty on raw sugar. |
to be tested according to polariscOpic |
strength, without any duty at all upon
refined sugars. We agreed to report the |
bill with that provision. and 1t was so |
printed. II was a graded duty. On Tues |
day morning we were to lay that bill be |
sore the Democratic members of the |
Finance Committee. Senators Harris, |
nd MeDhprGon
to do with IT, Senator Mills had taken |
the place OF Senator Vance. who was sick. |
ON Monday morning preceding the meet |
ing of the Finance COMMITTEES we were
Informed that a caucus of the Demo |
cratic members Of the Senate was to be |
held, and that the caucus was called by |
Mr.. German, who was chairman or the |
caucus. We went into the caucus. or |
course as Democrats. Senator Jones and |
myself, Senator Mills not attending. We |
stated TO the caucus what we had done |
The caucus remained in session three |
DAYS and we were instructed-the mem |
bers Of the Finance Committee-to go |
back with the bill and readjust IL 50
that IL could be acceptable. If possible. |
10 all Democratic members. We went |
into our committee-room and there mp |
peared before us Senator'S German. Brice. |
Hnl, Smith. Caffery. and White, the last
now Justice OF the Supreme Court, who |
was in the Senate and had been appointed |
but had not taken his seat on the bench. |
"The discussion was taken up at once
on the sugar schedule as soon as we got |
there and Senator German, think, stated |
that he was in favor. or he-thought II
would be right to put an ad valorem duty
OF d per cent. on sugars, with a one
fourth differential on refined sugars Sena- |
tor Caffery did the talking for the Louisi-
ana side of the question. the producers
He combatted the idea OF an ad Valorem
duty. He went so far as TO say that no
ad valorem duty would be accepted by
the producers at all, and he denied that
he had ever agreed TO any al valorem
duty. Senator German said that the un>
derstanding between the Louisiana sena-
tors and the balance was that they should
all act together. making an impression
on me. and think on all the COMMITTEES.
that they had an understanding that
they should fix this duty TO suit both pro-
ducers and refiners, and they discussed
that question-one affirming and the other |
denying
THAT went on for three quarters OF an |
hour The principal contention was sus-
tanned by Senator German. Senator Brice |
may have said something, but l think he