The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-02-09
NOTHING MUCH EXTRACTED.
IGNORANT AS THE TWO HAVE
MEYERS.
rHE BOOKS ARE TO BE PRODUCED.
On Saturday the LexOvy Committee
VIII Try to Obtain Definite In
formation of Some Kind.


hand today when the joint legislative
committee on trusts met in this city
today. Mr.. Searles left his home in
Krooklyn for Canton, Ohio, last Thurs
day evening after having been served
with a subpoena, and the committee
was disposed at its sitting on Friday
to declare him in contempt and take
steps for his punishment Mr. Searles
was warmly greeted by the members
of the committee.
Lawyer Edward M. Shepard, attor-
ney for the sugar company, arrived
soon after and Immediately entered
into conversation with the prospective
witness. Before taking the stand, Mr..
Searles, at Senator Lexow's request,
made statement that he only received
the subpoena as he was ON his way
to take train and that he left it was
his first duty to attend to the business
on hand at the time. Senator LexoW
reprovingly told Mr.. Searles that the
subpoena of the committee could not
be ignored by the millionaire or by the
poor man.
AT the close Of your testimony, Mr..
Searles," added Senator Lexow, the
committee will pass upon the question
Of contempt"
Mr.. Searles said his occupation was
the sugar refining business, and that
OF bank president and president of
several local corporations; secretary
and treasurer of the American Sugar
Refining company. He purchased and
held all the stock of the North River
Refining company. The purchase was
an individual purchase, he continued
and had no relation as to the value
of the property to the Sugar Refining
company. The circumstances were
somewhat peculiar, and he added, the
whole transaction was ventilated in
the court of appeals.
Mr.. Searles gave the sterotyped re-
ply: Il cannot recall" to a series OF
questions propounded by Senator
LeXoW, in regard to purchase of the
North River Refining company, in
Guiding the inquiry if the price was not
about $325,000.
Asked as to the present whereabouts
Of the companys books. the witness
said it was his opinion they were in
the archives of the subsidiary COM
panies, over which he had no control.
NORTH RIVER DEAL.
Now you might as well tell us what
was paid in the North River Sugar
Refining case. We are going to have
it, if it is in this world"
81 have no figures at the present time
by which 1 could give you the exact
figures" said the witness, who, how
ever, recalled that the price paid in
for the stock Of the North River SUI
gar company was $700,000.
''Is it not true that you made $780,,
00G over night on the transaction
1T is not true. I did not make $780,
600 over night in that transaction.
do you dispute that?"
81 do
Did you not consider, when you
were taking the 100000 worth of GER
tificates, that you were taking their
equivalent in value?"
at would be their value when they
became a part of the consolidated
stocks. 1t was my faith in their
ultimate value that induced me to
take them" The witness said that
the North River Refining company
was anxious to get cash instead OF
certificates, and, In order to accOmmO-
date, witness took the certificates off
it's hands. Mr.. Searles further said
that the transaction had the acquies-
| cence Of the directors and the stock
holders of the sugar trust. The wit
ness finally admitted that, instead Of
receiving 100000 worth of stock GER
tifcates from the North River Refining
company, he received only 1886, 600. At
this stage Stephen Little, the ex-
pert accountant, who had been sub
| pCenaed, announced himself, and, Oh
explaining to Senator LexOw that he in
nowise was concerned in the corpora
tion under investigation, was excused.
In reply to Senator Lexow, Mr.
Searles denied that his purchase of the
stock OF the North River company
vnas to crush out the company as a
! competitor in the sugar market In
reply to another question, witness said
| he could not say definitely whether
or not the actual value Of the stocks
| taken into the trust was less than
! $2C, ,000, 600.
''Is it not g fact that, of the $50
100000 of stock in the sugar trust, only
! d. third Of that figure is actual value ?''
by actual value do you mean bricks
/ and mortar?" inquired Mr.. Searles.
who finally stated that his mind was
| not sufficiently clear on the subject.
! Witness said he had not known the fig
| ures in the case, and on being asked
| by Senator LexOw If they were avail
able, Mr.. Searles said he presumed
they could be supplied from the books
| Of the company.
| How much did the four BROOKLYN
refneries that were shut up receive
| in certificates?''
81 do not remember the amount"
WAS Mr.. Havemeyer mistaken when
|
ed the figures and estimates Of the
! various officers and stockholders Of the
component companies without investi-
cation and issued certificates upon that
/ basis? 2"
Il think the statements Of the reports
or the various companies were gen
orally accepted as a basis for estimat-
ing the value Of the property"
Mr.. Searles denied positively that
his company controlled the price of
sugar, and also allegations that it
forced competitors to the wall bv re-
duc1ng prices in certain localities.
QUESTION OF CAPITAL.
Mr.. Searles said the capital stock did
not represent it's entrinsic value and
that the public only suffered in case
| OF oVer-capitalization. "Companies first
representing the sugar trust were
| HaYemeyer & Elder, with a capitaIiza-
ton Of 100000; Dick & Meyer, 5000. .0OO.
and others entered on basis Of $i00. :
000," the witness said.
Then the valuation Of the proDer-
ty," said Chairman Lexow, was NOT
! correct as represented in the certif1-
Gates or else the capital stock was
| false?''
| The witness did not think SO.
| Do not you, as a business man.
think that the issuing of capital stock
at figures that do not represent real
value is the principal vice in corpora
tiOns?'
| ar hardly think +bo+ ie +bo +r,,+L o.