The record-union., 1899-06-15
Havemayer Reads a Statement Be-
fore the Commission.
The Sugar Refinery Company's President
on the Effects Of Trusts.
Declares That They Are Not Re-
sponsible for the Present Condd-
tions-Says the Mother OF ALI
the Troubles il the Customs Tar
If Bill.


the Troubles il the Customs Tar
If Bill.
WASHINGTON June 14.-Henry o.
Havemeyer, President Of the American
Sugar Refining Company, was examin-
ed by the industrial commission TO day
in connection with the investigation of
trusts. His testimony related almost
wholly to the sugar industry, and he
opened a vigorous attack upon the Gus
toms tariff, which, he declared, was
the mother of all trusts becoming
such by providing IAN ordinate protec-
tion to manufactured articles" This
attack was made in written state
ment, which he read.
The full text OF the statement read by
Mr.. Havemeyer is as follows:
The mother of all troubles is the
customs tariff bill. The existing bill
and the preceding one have been the oc-
caSion for the formation of all the large
trusts. with very few exceptions, mas
much as they provide for an inordi-
nate protection to all the interests of
the country-sugar refining excepted.
Economic advantages incident to the
same line of business are a great in
centive to their formation, but these
bear a very insignificant proportion TO
the advanta ages granted in the way of
protection under the customs tariff.
There probably is not an industry
that requires a protection of more than
10 per cent ad valorem, and it Is to
obtain what is provided over such per-
centage in the tariff that leads to the
formation of what are commonly spoken
of as trusts
with a protection to an industry not
exceeding 10 per cent, all menace to
the community of trusts would cease.
This 10 per cent would represent the
difference in cost of production and
likewise act as protection against sur
plus products of foreign countries be-
ing dumped in our local markets, there
by interfering with the regular and
economic working of our industries.
Any advantages that might then accrue
to such combinations they would be
fully entitled to and the public would
not be damaged thereby, as any expan-
sion of price would be met by foreign
competition and relief
Il have said that sugar was an ex-
ceptfon The rate of protection on sugar
is an eighth of a cent per pound, which
is about 31a per cent. ad valorem and
is not the difference in the cost of re-
fining between this and foreign coun-
tries. The least it should have is 3
per cent, or in specific figures, "A per
cent. per pound. The sugar refining in
dustry of this country, no matter what
form its organization, is entitled to ad-
equate protection if any industry.
There are at least 100000 people de-
pendent upon it. What it pays or has
paid TO it's stockholders in the past
represents nothing more than falr
return to the capital invested con-
sidering the extent of the business.
THE United States tariff bill, in as
sessing about $40 per ton duty on inn
ported sugar, pays into the pockets
of a few Louisianans on their annual
crop of 2:0.p0O tons, $20,O00OO0; to the
Hawaiian Islanders, probably repre-
sented by $50 foreigners, on their an
nual crop of 2J0.0O0 tons, S1OOO0,00O
say 100000 tons produced elsewhere in
the United States, S4,OOO,OO0. Here
you have 24O00,000 extracted from
the people of the United States for the
sake of getting the revenue Of $40 per
ton on foreign production.
people by the throat and then the Gov
ernors and the Attorney Generals Of
the Southern States take action, not
against the cause, but against the ma
chinery which the people employ to
rifle the public's pockets.
.srhere appears to be in the public
mind distinction between robbery by
an individual and that by a corpor-
alton. What is commendable in an
Individual appears to be dishonest in
a corporation.
II maintain that it IS material to
the public in what form business is
done. whether by an individual, firm.
a corporation or even the trust. These
are merely forms of conducting busi-
ness. or in other words, machinery for
the operation of business. 1t is the
duty of the Government to see that
under the tariff laws they enact, this
machinery cannot in its action result
to the detriment or improvements of
the public
..It would have been very easy and
proper for the Government to have put
a corresponding international revenue
TAX on sugar simultaneously with the
customs duty, and have these $24 600,
600. which now go into the pockets of
a few individuals go into the treasury
for the benefit of the whole people. If
the expenses of the Government need
ed to be provided for, and protection to
American industries was desired the
imposition of 10 per cent. ad valorem
on all manufactured products would
have settled the matter. There IS
every reason why, if revenue is de-
sired. that with a duty on raw mater
ials of foreign product, correspond
ing internal revenue should be levied
on such products and the protection o1
manufacturers thereof limited TO an ad-
.ditional 10 per cent
..I repeat that all this agitation
against trusts is against merely the
business machinery employed TO laKe
from the public what the Government
in its tariff laws says it is proper ano
suitable they should have. 1t is the
Government. through its tariff laws
which plumbers the people and tne
trusts. etc, are merely the machinery
for doing it.
sThe statements made before the
committee in Congress and the speecns
against the Sugar Refining Company
are absolutely devoid of truth-utterty
nnworthy of credit The intention u
sc1,nrress. however, to enact something
INTO 2aw contrary to what the sugar