The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-02-06
MANY QUESTIONS PUT TO THE
BROTHER MONOPOLISTS.
What They Regard as Fair Profits
Reason for Entering the Coffee
Observation-Disclosures Testimony.

il is supposed might be affected by the in
vestigation. A letter was read from c. b.
Richards & Co, steamship agents of this
city, calling attention to the alleged exist
ence of a pool by the transatlantic steam
ship companies and requesting investi-
cation into its methods. Theodore A.
Havemeyer, vice president OF the American
Sugar Refinery Company, was then sworn.
Having explained that prior TO 1871 he was
connected with the eight sugar refining
companies now operating as the American,
Mr.. Havemeyer said that he had nothing
to do with the commercial fiscal side of
the business. He could not give the capital
ization of the various companies that were
absorbed i'm 1891 without a reference to the
books; that a matter which Mr..
Searles would probably be able to inform
the committee. The question was then put
TO the witness:
DO you (meaning the sugar refining COM
panies) transact any business save sugar
refining?
Il think not replied Mr. Havemeyer.
Have you not recently been led into the
manufacture of Coffee"
Yes, sir. | am connected with a coffee
What was the object of your consolida-
ton in 1872
Was not your company organized; Mr.
Havemeyer, to control the refining and sale
the United States q
Il think not, sir.
DO you not control the sugar market of
the United States?"
WAS your company not organized for the
of labor?"
mo. SIR
THE CAPITAL STOCK.
Have you not increased the capital stock
of the company since 1912
| Yes, sir
ITO what eXtent?'
Il should say s25. 900, 000
"How many sugar companies outside of
! yours are there in the United States?'
| Il should say abont eight
The witness then enumerated the names
of the companies In reply to another ques
tion Mr.. Havemeyer saia that the Ameri-
! from i3 10 10 per cent of the sugar manu-
| factured in the United States.
Why was the stock increased?'
| ITO purchase other companies
| What are these companies"
| THE Franklin, the knight. the Spreckels
and the Delaware Sugar Refining Com
| panies. of Philadelphia"
| rs it not fact that the price of sugar
| increased owing to the acquisition of these
| four cOmpanieS?"
| Il think not. The price of sugar is lower
| now than 1t was then.
Who fixed the prices at the board meet
ings?"
| My brother" responded the witness.
| Reverting to the recent advent of the
sugar company into the coffee trade, the
| chairman OF the committee said: why did
you go into the coffee business
| Il thought Ii Was pretty good business.
Are you willing to swear that the Off
| ganized for the purpose of shutting out
eompetition against the American Sugar
They are not, sir the witness said
| slowly.
Why do you hesitate to answer"
Snr ions Ions hat rr0r1c-
take time to follow the drift Of your ques-
| tions
| Witness said that part of the cry about
| competition in the sugar market was news
| paper talk, but admitted defending a suit
| i'm Ohio brought about through the activity
| OF competition there.
| when did you purchase the Woolson
| stock in Ohio?'
''Ill have to refer you to my brother, :,
| replied the witness
| WANTS BIG PROFITS.
Asked if his company organized in New
Jersey so as to evade the payment of taxa
ton under the laws of the State of New
York he said, Mr.. Parsons, their lawyer
would have to be asked about that. Mr..
Parsons had advised it. The preferred
stock of the company was S37 900 600 and
the common stock s37 OO0, 900. A dividend of
per cent. was declared last year on the
preferred and IL per cent on the common.
In addition there may have been an ac-
cumulated surplus Il would not go into
business" Mr. Havemeyer said IF l did
not make Is. 16 or 20 per cent. in it,.
Senator Lexow quoted some figures from
a financial paper which showed that in
| s9.00O.000 to $4,000, 900. Are these figures
correct?' asked Senator Lexow.
II can't say. If you got them from Mr..
SearleS. they are correct.
DO You know any business not in the
nature of monopoly that pays 10 or l6
per cent ??
| PLENTY of them
Tell us one of them.
| Coffee for instance
| And that is the reason you went into
it?''
"One of the reasons" smiled Mr. Have
"Ar6 you willing to swear that there is
no agreement, verbal or written between
| your company and any other regarding the
| liking or maintaining of prices?
| Il am willing TO swear that. as far as
know. there is no such agreement
examination of Mr.. Searles secretary and
| treasurer of the American Sugar Company.
before calling Mr.. Havemeyer to the wit
ness chair. but waived his preference upon
being informed that Mir. Searles could not
| conveniently appear before the committee
until tomorrow. Henry Havemeyer. pres
| ident of the American Sugar Refinery Com
| pany. was sworn and described the organ
iZation of the Sugar Trust i'm 1857 The as
sets. real and personal property of fifteen
| companies. were purchased by the Ameri-
can Refinery Company at the time of the
amalgamation.
| of the fifteen original companies were not
| the directors of the present Sugar Trust
| Mr.. Havemeyer said that six of the orig
| inal directors with the addition of William
| Parsons. are still on the directory board of
the American Sugar Refinery Company.
| Asked where the original document of
| agreement was, Mr.. Havemeyer said he did
| not know and doubted its existence now.
| The American Refinery Company of New
| Jersey. Mr.. Havemeyer said took the place
| in 1891 of the former so-called trust. 1t was
| done through purchase. The new company
| acquired all the property before held by
the trust. and no more. and was capi-
| talized first at 100000 afterward in
creased TO $15.0D00oo. The greater part of
| the SIS COS. 600 increase went in puchase OF
| the Philadelphia property
DOESN'T CONTROL THE MARKET.
| In answer to direct questions. Mr.. Have
meyer denied categoricalH that his COM
pany. controlled the sugar market i'm the
| United States; fixed the price OF refined
sugars. controlled the product OF sugar. OF