The San Francisco call., 1897-05-29
NAILS A
FAkER To
THE WALL
Examiner" Yarn About
the Watsonville Plant
Exposed.
CLAUsSPRECKELS MAKES
ANSWER.
Names Were Given of Indi-
viduals Who Had No Stock
in the Company.
ERRORS WERE THICK AS
BEES.
No Struggle to Get Possession of Dr..
Buckley's Shares, as None S ood
in His Name.
ERRORS WERE THICK AS
BEES.
No Struggle to Get Possession of DR..
Buckley's Shares, as None S ood
in His Name.

The taking newspaper of San Francisco
has been exposed again. This time the
exposure is SO complete and convincing
that the faker has no honorable course
open but retraction and apology.
Claus Spreckeis takes up q yarn printed
in the Examiner of May % and e.tab-
fishes the fact beyond the shadow OF a
doubt that the story, heraided under con-
spicuous display lines concerning the
shareholders and the stock of the Watson
vile sugar plant is false from top to
bottom. Here is the way in which Mr..
Spreckels disposes of the Examiners ex-
elusive canard:
To the Editor of The Call: In the Examiner
of May %, 1897, there is an article with such
headings as these: Held Up by the Trust"
"Outside Stockholders in the WatsonvilIe
Plant Forced to Sen,'' "Claus spreckels Gave
the Stockholders No Option" Grip of the
Beet-Sugar Plants" This article goes on to
say that the Watsonville Beet-Sugar Company
was largely owned by San Francisco business
men and that "more than half of the stock
was owned by Mr.. Spreckels''; that in order 10
turn over control OF this beet-sugar factory
TO the sugar trust Mr.. Spreckels forced the
outside stockholders to seIl"; that mot one
was anxious to surrender the stock, which
paid handsomely, but that no one dared 10
disobey the request to sell it''
l wish to say that this article is utterly
false-false in assertion, false in insinuation
and false in innuendo, There is nothing in
it that is true except the assertion that the
Watsonville Beet-Sugar Company had a capi-
tai stock and had paid dividends of SLY per
share on same. Any one OF the gen tiemen
therein named holding stock viii, if asked,
say that the article is untrue Even the table
of shareholders is not correct. This is cor
rect list of what were called the "outside
shareholders:
NJ Ehrman, so shares; Joseph Ehrman, 40
shares; Fredericka Ehrman, so shares: Louis
Sloss, 100 shares; John L. Roster, 100 shares;
A. L. Tubbs, 100 shares; Samuel Sussman, 80
shares; r. H. Plummer, so shares; z. ].
Molera, 100 shares; W. C. Waters $50 shares;
John D. Spreckels, $50 shares; a B. Spreckels,
200 shares.
In the printed list in the Examiner there
were, among the various other errors the
names OF people who had no stock at all. The
Examiner put down DR.. Buckley as possessing
fifty shares and said: 1.-THE last fifty out
standing were not obtained without strug-
gle, and il is said that DR.. Buckley was paid q
higher price than his fellows. in every case
they have received ell their money back and
$317 share to boot"
This is also false. There were no fifty shares
standing in the name of DR.. Buckley. There
were no shares in the name OF DR.. Buckley at
all. Therefore there could not have been a
struggle over the shares standing in the
name OF DR.. Buckley" and therefore DR.. Buck
ley could not have been paid higher price
than his fellows" AS 70 the "original stock
holders receiving $317 a SHARE that also is
false. Each stockholder received $500 share
The statement that any one of them received
$317 q ghare Is also false. So is the statement
that they were 'held up" by Mr.. Spreckes or
forced to selr' by him. The stock kholders
sold their shares voluntarily.
l do not see that there is much left to reply
to in this article. From the heading to the
last line, from top 10 bottom, from the middle
up and down and across, it is false. But if
there be any one who is inclined to believe
such circumstantial and detailed falsehood
II anybody believes "held up" these gentle
men OF "forced them to sell,' or il any one
believes that / sought an unjust advantage
over them by paying them $500 share for
stock which cost 500, 1 can only say that
will sell my shares 10 them any day for $40
less than / paid them for it, They received
$500. will turn over to any one of these
stockholders the amount of stock he sold me
at $3.50 share. Thus they can make money
by buying stock back again.
CLAUS SPRECKELs.