The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1897-02-19
LEXOW DEFIED.
Havemeyer Tells Him His Eff
forts Are Useless.
Trust Has Been Passed Upon by
Supreme Court.
1T rs NOT A MONOPOLY
And It is Therefore a Legiti-
mate Concern.
Styles the Investigation a Per-
secution of the Company.

New York, Feb. 1s.-Mr. Flint of the
United States Rubber company contin-
ued his testimony before the Lexow
committee yesterday.
Witness did not know whether or not
the United States Rubber company
would be likely to advance money to
smaller concerns and refrain from con-
trolling their output. He said the
Brookhaven concern was bought mere
ly because it could be bought cheap but
ne did not know what its stock sold for.
He added that other purchases Of plants
We're contemplated.
Concerning the purchase of the Sc
tauket plant, witness said labor there
was paid rs per cent less than in the
United States Rubber company. Mr..
Lexow asked if this was the case why
the trust had bought and closed the
Setauket mill
The witness did not give a direct an
SWer to the question but entered on an
explanation showing that the United
States Rubber company had paid and
was now paying higher wages than was
any other concern in the rubber bust
ness. Witness said that the company
had thought it desirable to develop the
concern that cost 81, 800, 900 at the ex-
penSe of the Setauket factory whose
plant cost $3.50, O00 Witness said that
the company since its conSolida ton had
paid only little over one per cent on
its common stock.
been issued for properties closed?" ask
ed Chairman LexOW.
Less than 2 per cent of the total
capitalization of the United States Rub
Der company
Mr.. Flint said the amount of COM
mission stock issued, representing good
will, was equal to 500 000, 900.
By way of explanation, Mr. Flint sta
ted that one of the objects of consolida-
ton was to enable the property to be
put on the market in realizable form.
After recess. Mr.. Henry o. Havemey-
er and John E. Parsons, president and
counsel, respectively, of the American
Sugar Refining company were present.
Mr.. Havemeyer said that the figures
showing the distribution of the original
stock of the company were cut out of
the deed by Mr.. Parsons by permis-
sion of the Arnold committee at the
time of the investigation by the senate
committee.
DO you mean that?"
Yes, sir; I say the figures were cut
out at that time by Mr.. Parsons, with
out regard to anything before or since.
The figures were not replaced to my
Who had the custody of the mutilat-
ed trust deed?"
Mr.. Parsons"
why was it that you and your as
SocfateS were so solicitous to conceal
these figures 90
"a hundred people agreed to have
that done. am not responsible. The
OeeQ SnOulQ nave D6on destroyed. 1t
was that deed that caused all the trou-
BILE and hostile legislation and this per-
secution.''
You mean prosecution, don't you?"
mo, I say persecution. All the fuss
has been over that deed. If that deed
had not been in existence the investi-
gators would have been fighting the
air. All this thing has been swept
aside by the supreme court
What do you mean by that?'
"Oh, l thought you were converSant
with things that have gone before in
this matter by former Investigations.
mean that we have had this inveStiga-
ton before, and that one judge has
ruled that we were a criminal mOnOp-
oily and another judge that we were
not. The supreme court swept all this
aside by declaring that we were not a
monopoly, inasmuch as we did not stife
competition"
Assemblyman Warner here asked
about the books of the original trust,
they went out of existence in 1891.
Were they destroyed?"
It don't know. I don't keep the
books
Il won't swear to anything 1 don't
know. 1 am particular about my oath.
How do you account for the rise in
sugar since the consultations?
by the demand"
you have been subpoenaed to pro-
duce the original deed of trust?"
II don't believe it is in existence.
last saw it with Mr.. Parsons as Gus
Mr.. Parsons was then sworn. He
admitted having been the custodian OF
the first deed.
that was extracted? .
II have no recollection of seeing it,. 1t
was claimed at that time, believe, that
there was no reason why the paper shoulo
paper since 1885, and in reply to another
question, said the directors at their meet
ing yesterday had not considered the pro-
ducing of the minute book
This finished the probing of that COM
Henry Burn. president of the National
Wall Paper company. was then called:
He said he was not one OF the original
said the National Wall Paper company
was composed of twenty-eight different
How many companies were left out?'
About H.
what amount of business did the COM
bination secure?"
About 65 per cent, Judging by the ma
chimes as against IS of those not in the
What was the capital stock issued?"
THE original issue was $l4. 900 SUBJ
sequently raised to $227, 900 900
How did you arrive at the proper dis
tribution of stock2'
I'VE calculated the profits of the var
ious concerns for certain years and null
Witness said the output for the consoli-
dated concern in 1886 was lbs, 900 rolls
of wall paper.
1.-The Consolidation brought about an in
crease of labor in the various concerns"
Mr.. Burn said.
witness said the output had been re-
duced 10 per cent and that wages had not
been reduced but were higher since the
consolidation.
Does the agreement you have. with
sellers or jobbers restrict them to the sale
of your productions"
yes sir"
Witness said he heard of the existence
of a wall paper trust or club which was
pany.