The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-06-15

/ SaIlDE that was the business OF the COm-
pany alone, but he afterwards made an in
cidental statement which the commissioners
construed into an admission that the bust
ness was not profitable now. The witness
confessed that his company had very little
regard for the welfare OF rivals in business.
saying that prestige. ability. experience
and wealth would win In the long run In the
struggle. and that trusts were an example
OF the survival Of the fttest in business
That is trade" he said. 'and the sooner you
realize Il and quit trying 10 control ii by
federal legislation the better for all. A man
cannot expect TO have himself continually
wet-pursed by the government. II men Go
not want TO buy our stocks they need not.
They do not need government protection.
III they wade in and get stuck, let them get
out. and II they wish to wade in again let
them 90 so. The fate OF rival concerns is
Speaking of the .'ethics Of life,' suggested
by a member of the commission. Mr.: Have
ethics. 1 know nothing about them. / am
talking about business"
DE declared that the tariff enabled the
extent Of 50 per ton. and said, incidentally,
that Mr.. Carnegie had not yet stated what
he was going TO do with his money.
On the question of labor, Mr.. Havemeyer
said the laboring element was forced to
form organizations. but that in doing so
unions had the effect Of bringing other
men down to a low level" He c~ontended
that he was a friend of labor. and said that
good men in the employ of the trust were
paid 10 per cent more than they could get
elsewhere.
Mr.. Havemeyer said that many things
were lone in business which looked cold
blooded and harsh. but that business condi-
tions often required conduct justifying such
Characterization. The farmers. he thought,
ought to establish a trust for their protec-
ton.
He declined to say whether he was in
terested in the Mollenhauer and Nash re-
~fneries, and also whether recent dividends
Of the trust were paid from current re,
/ that his ROmnQnV had moi gone mo a
combination with any OF the Independent
refineries. Reports that such a consolida-
ton had BEEN effected were untrue.
Replying TO a question as to how he could
. conduct business at a loss and still declare
dividends. Mr.. Havemeyer declared laugh
irgly: lone Is an executive art ana the
other a matter of business"
The witness expressed the opinion that IL
would be a good plan to expose the business
books TO a government inspector. He closed
with a protest against what he called the
tariff determinations against sugar. %reiter-
a apaIgs ane com ~ Mas ons fnI business. M 'el
The sugar refners have never mad a
fair hearing at the hands of the ways and
means committee he said. When came
| here as an individual they were willing to
give me anything. but when l came as the
representative of the American REFINING
| Company, five times the importance, asking
for an adequate tariff, / was told 10 get
out and received no consideration. Yet the
day Of the indiv!dual is past sxn If the ~ m fbs
individual he must CO."
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
Replying to questions by Professor jerks,
after he had concluded the reading OF his
paper. Mr.. Havemeyer said the American
company was capitalized at much less than
1t was worth. but for the clamor against
trusts" he said. lit could be sold for three
times its capitalization" Yet he thought
the refneries could be duplicated for $780,
100000 or $40. O00.O 0o. The present capacity
Of the trust Is" he said. 1900 barrels a
day and the output 10000" He thought the
trust was refining about 90 per cent. of the
sugar refined in the United States.
The witness spoke very freely or the meth
DDS Of the company in preserving and ex-
tending its business. OF the earlier history
of the enterprise he said he did not tight the
Harrison refinery at Philadelphia. But we
had TO fight Spreckles, when We came into
the field. with his enormous plant. We nad
to do that or suspend our oivloehus; We We
| got the refinery" The late drop in the price
of sugar had been caused by the starting OF
new re finer.es which had threatened TO take
80 per cent. of the business. 1t was a part
of our policy to put prices down and let
the opposition take the result Whatever IL
II may be-. Every sale mace by the oppo-
sition displaced so much of the American
company's product" he said. I'VE must
protect our own business"
Mr.. Havemeyer then went on TO say that
what the company did 1t did not do for
motives of philantnropy-that it had its own
SnaTenOlueTS 10 pTOleCS- ANY Douy Sdh "a
our stock" he continued, and as a conse-
quence, the public owns the stock. But l
doubt whether anyone would want any of
the stock of the Independent refineries.'
How many stockholders have you?"
asked Professor jerks.
About 11,000," he replied, and added:
enough to take Cuba-and they would take
Ii IL they could"
The latter remark was made in a light
vein. He stated as his opinion that the
Cuban sugar should be brought in free of
duty and that this course would bring re-
fined sugar down TO 3 cents a pound.