Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-06-02
WOULD SHIFT BLAME
Gerbracht Questioned on Su-
gar Underweighing Frauds.
ATTACKED BY PROSECUTOR
Sharply Examined as to Reports on
Tests.
NO FAITH IN POLARIZATION
Former Superintendent Denies He
Was Directed by MI. Have
meyer to Falsify.
ATTACKED BY PROSECUTOR
Sharply Examined as to Reports on
Tacfs
NO FAITH IN POLARIZATION

NEW YORK, June 2-Ernest w. Ger
bracht's effort to put the responsibility
for sugar underweighing frauds solely
upon Oliver Splitter, former superintend-
dent of the American Refining Company's
Williamsburg docks, or by implication
upon men now dead, was sharply at
tackled by Prosecutor Henry L. Stimson,
at the resumption of the sugar conspiracy
trial today. Gerbracht was superintendent
OF the Williamsburg refinery during the
period when the cneating devices on the
scales were in use. He Is the second of
the three men on trial to present his de-
fensc. James F. Bendernagel's side Of the
case has already been presented
The defense of Charles r. Heike, secre-
tary Of the sugar trust, is yet to be SUBJ
mitted.
Mr. StimsOn questioned Gerbracht on
crOss-exa mination awhile today as to how
he accounted for discrepancies between
government weights and refinery weights
in the technical statements vi ,hout get
ting much information cut of the witness
Then he took new tack.
Now l think that you said that II. o.
Havemeyer directed you to falsify the
reports the tests of raw sugar?' said
Mr.. StimSon.
Denies discriminating Havemeyer.
mo. / did not / never said any such
thing" exclaimed Gerbracht, excitedly.
Il think you testified that he tod you
to make the tests of raw sugar low" con-
iinued Mr.. Stimson.
NO, sir. He told me to keep them
low" corrected the witness.
well" said Mr.. Stimson, with a note
of triumph in his voice, ,"the difference
n
AS matter of fact, did not this amount
to direction to affect the price paid to
the sugar merchant from whom the sugar
was bCught?"
mo: 1t referred only to the cost Of
refining sugar.
GerDracnt said he had no idea of any
other purpose. He denied that he had
ever withdrawn refinery figures of raw
sugar tests and substituted figures fur
nished by tests made in the Wall street
Offices of the trust. Mr.. Stimson there
upon read into the evidence letters to
show that the figures of the tests were
changed time and time again.
Gerbracht explained that he didn't make
the tests personally. They were made in
the refinery room.
Made Lower Than True Figures.
"Now. didn't you make the tests lower
than their true flgures?' asked Mr.. Stim-
son.
Yes"
"And didn't Mr.. Havemeyer tell you
to-"
''Ves."
80 now you don't object to my saying
that Mr.. Havemeyer directed you to fall
sify the tests?'
II do; he didn't"
"Do you mean to say there's a differ
ence between falsifying tests and keeping
testings lower than their true figure"
Yes, there Is a difference"
What is the difference? What do you
mean?" asked Mr.. Stimson.
II mean there was no true test In polar
ization," said Gerbracht-
"W'hy did you use the polarization test
If II was not true? To fool the sugar
growers?'
II don't know" answered the witness.
"Well. I would like to know the ethical
basis of this practice" observed Mr..
StimsOn.