The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-02-11
THE SUGAR AND COFFEE MEN
AGAIN RAKED OVER THE
GOALS.
POINTED QUESTION ASKED ARBUCkLE
How Long Will the Public Stand tlity
Per Cent Diyi lends ?-ArbuCklc Said
Havcmcycr Told What Was
Not True.

|
tive committee on trust investigation
Chairman Lcxow announced that the fail
ure on the part of Judge Scarles sccrc
tary and treasurer of the Sugar Refinery
company, to appear before the committee
today, would bring on him such punish
ment for contempt as the law of the STATE
Of New York prescrbes.
Mr.. Searles was not on hand today. Ed
ward NJ. Shepherd and John NJ. Persons
attorneys for the sugar company, cX
planned that the subpoena to appear before
the committee was served on Mr.. Scarles
| just as he was leaving the city. He was
| today in Washington and could meet tn,
committee on Monday. On that day, Mr.
Shepherd said, Mr.. Searles would b,
| either in this city or Albany as would best
| suit the convenience Of the committee, and
submit to the proposed inquisition. Chair
man LcXow said the committee would de
eide in executive session what should bt
done in the premises.
James Arbuckc was then called. He
said ii was not true as was stated by
President Havcmeyer, that the sugar com
pany did not threaten to throw him out
of the coffee business if he engaged in the
coffee business.
There is no profit in the coffee bust
ness" Mr.. Arbuckle said, and he went
on to explain that in 1896 the profits Oh
coffee were less than 81 of cent per
pound; in 1895 II little less than 40 of
a cent per pound and in 1904 little less
than Clio of cent per pound.
John Arbuckle, business associate OF
James Arbuckle, was then recalled and
said the coffee market had tluctuatcd
wildly for the past ten years. He said
there was no profit in the coffee business
and read statistics to prove the state.
ment. This was direct contraditon of the
statements made by Mr.. Havemeyer yes
terday, who said that the coffee business
was profitable and thriving field of in.
duStry.
In reply to Mr.. Lexow. witness testified
That the firm of Arbuckle e. Co. and w.
F.. Mclaughlin of Chicago controls the
bulk of the coffee trade in the United
States. and said Mr.. Havemeyer controls
lhe bulk OF the sugar business in the same
manner. There were several grades of
coffee, ranging in price from 10 cents to
80 cents q pound, the latter price being
paid for Java and Mocha.
what was the purchase price on coffee
when the American Sugar. Refining COM
pany went into the coffee business through
the Wolfson Spice company"
Il should say the price for Rio was 10
cents pound, and it sold at II cents a
pound TO the middlemen."
What price do you sell il now"
AT Is II cents per pound"
Does a profit accrue?"
II am not DrpDl rod IN car met nov.
And the WolfsOn Spice company sold
at IL cents a pound 2"
Yes, sir"
DO You, as manufacturer. consider it
fair to force from the consumers enormous
profits. which are distributed among the
directors and stockholders. by way of ex-
orhitant prices?"
The witness tried to cvade the question
and the spectators gave evidence of their
approval of the question.
Senator LeXow pounded the desk with
his gavel and commanded silence.
How long will the public stand such n
thing" asked Mr.. Lexow.
Witness said the 80 per cent dividend
only represented ) per cent dividend on
the present value of the stock
rs it fact that the Wolfson Spice COM
pany are putting up better coffee at n
less price than you for the purpose of
driving you out of the market?"
Il think our coffee is better than theirs. -
the witness replied.
The committee then took recess to con-
slider the case of Mr.. Searles secretary
and treasurer of the American Sugar Re
inning company, who was TO have been
present today.
After recess Chairman Leyow an
nounccd that Mr.. Searles would be given
until 10 a. M, Monday, to answer the
subpoena of the committee.
President III. a. Havemeyer was then
recalled. He said that the four refineries
IN Philadelphia which were absorbed in
1884 still continue in operation.
How many men had you in your en-
ploy in New York state at the time of the
organization"
Il am unable to tell you"
Were there 0,0OO on the outside?"
II should not think So"
Were not 1000 men discharged at one
timew
1T is not true; We did not have that
many men employed"
He said: II think my brother was in
error when he said that some of the re-
tineries were. closed after the consolida-
ton in 1891"
Mr.. Havemeycr then read long list of
figures showing the profit per pound of
refined sugar for q specific number of
years.
John Bergen, who had been in the en-
ploy of the American Sugar Refining COM
pany in various capacities from 1886 to
1893, was then called. He said that in
1892 he was in the employ of the SUGAR
company as dock foreman, and that at
the time of the formation Of the sugar
trust in 1887 between 1000 and 5000 men
were discharged. Asked as to the number
rendered idle by the closing down of the
Brooklyn concern, he said 1900 men We're
discharged. Witness said he understood
that one of the refncries was now being
operated as coffee mill. Eight refineries
were closed, he said, since the formation
of the company. and this coffee concern
is the only one of them now in operation.
John Arbuckle again took the stand and
testified that he controlled at least one
quarter of the coffee trade in the United
States. Mr.. Arbuckle said he wanted To
explain that the price of coffee was very
variable and gave 1t as his candid opinion
that it was the most speculative business
in the country.
Have you an agreement to fix prices"
NO, sir, we have no agreement, we
only fix our own prices"
This ended the work of the committee