Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1902-02-14

Permit me, therefore, first to establish
that gentleman's authority in the Amer
lean Sugar Refining Company
Q. So that you state, since 1891, the
price of refined sugar is the price that
Hayemeyer and Elder put mp on the
wall:
A. Mr.. Havemeyer is the president.
@. That is simply the controlling
power ! mean?
A. That is the controlling power.
9. That is the chief executive power
that fixes the price of sugar;
\. Yes. These prices are based on
the market price of raw sugar.
Divested of all verbiage, the question
at issue is. shall the Sugar Trust con-
troll the American market or shall il
| have active competition from the cane
sugar Of Louisiana and the beet sugar of
the North? That the existing tariff is
an absolute necessity to the production
of both kinds Of domestic sugar is a pro-
position which leave to my compeers
70 establish.
The relief Of Cuba Is but an incident
in the larger policy of the Sugar Trust
TO crush all competitors. The greatest
competitor this organization has to fear
is the beet-sugar industry of the North
and West, which is developing with
such rapidity as to astound the Eastern
reGners.
ON page 1872, Mr.. Havemeyer's testi-
,,,o,,- -oo,lc a.. fo1lo,vs.
Q. Now how can sugar be made in
Germany from beets, or in the Philip
pines from cane, or in any other part of
the world cheaper than you can make
it here:
\. Because. in the evolution Of sugar
refining, refined sugar can bee made di.
rectly from the beet without the inter
mediation of the sugar refinery.
Q. Then it is not the cane sugar
abroad that You fear coming in, but the
beet:
\. Both.
ON page 500 Mr. Atkins testimony
reads as follows:
Q. Do You think it desirable to have
a considerable domestic production of
sugar-raw sugar;
\. No; | do not at the present
enormous cost 70 the consumer.
9. DO YOU think il desirable for the
Government 70 do anything 10 encour-
age the domestic production:
y. No; do not.
What Is the attitude of the Sugar
Trust toward all competitors:
ON page JOS Mr.. Havemeyer's test
mony reads as follows;
Q. If you can make itunproftable to
| them (other refinersl, they will stop
their sales aud in the long run the eN-
pectatiou Is that the profit Will be larger
| to your stockholders:
! 4. That would bee the natural in
ference. OF course it goes without say
/ ing If we protect our own MEETINGS, II
can only Doe done under the condition of
/ things that makes IL Improbable for our
competitors, the real motive being the
/ protection of our own business, and the
result being an absence of profit 90 them.
Again, from Mr.. Havemeyer's testi-
lmony, ON page l20.
o. Now, 1 also understood YOU to
/ imply at least that il is the policy of the
/ American Sugar Refining Company 20
crush ont all competition, If possible:
a. But that IL not So; there is no
such testimony. / understand it has
( been put in that form 10y one OF the
gentlemen, hut 10 is not the fact. What
/ j sand was that 10 was the policy of the
/ American Company 90 maintain and
| protect IT'S trade, and If it resulted i'm
crushing competitor it is no concern
/ OF the American Company. If hc gets
iu the pres, that is his affair not ours.
O. And if anyone iptcrfCrcs with the
/ business, profits. or competition of the
/ American sugar Refining Company 10 is
/ It's policy 10 prevent IT., If possible:
81. by lowering profit, 90 defy IN.
d. And If lt results iu crushing him
! ont
L. Jpterrupung) That is his af.
fair.
@. Not the affair Of the American
Sugar Refining Company:
a NO.
Again, from Mr. Hayemcyer's testi.
mony. page l25:
O. when you sol in this country,
YOU control the price:
A. y cs sir
I O. And il lthe trustl was organized,
as ! understand il, with a view OF con
trolling the price and output 10 the peo-
pie of this country?
a. That was one Of the objects of
consolidation
@. And You have succeeded in doing
lit:
A. Yes sir.
O. That wa, the principal object i'm
organizing the American Sugar Refining
| Company.
a. 1t may be said that was the prin-
cipal object
This testimony was read to Mr.
IIavemcyer as having been given 10y him
before the LeNow committee.
ON page sd the Industrial Commission
states. "lr. Havemeyer's testimony
before the Lexow committee i'm 1896 was
read To- him aud be stated that he stood
bv every word Of it,"
ON page l42, Mr.. Jarvie, of Arbuckle
Brothers, the principal competitor Of
4 the American Sugar Refining Company.