Pierre weekly free press. (Pierre, S.D.) 1889-19??, 1910-12-08
AFTER SUGAR CO.
GOVERNMENT PETITION DE.
MANDs DISSOLUTION OF AMER
iCAN REFINING COMPANY.
FILE LONG EXPECTED SUIT
Attacks Methods OF Fl. o. Havemeyer
Deceased. = Prosecutor Charges
He Got stoooo,ooo
as Gift.

Washington, d. C.-Attacking the
American Sugar Refining company, Ia
miliarly known as the sugar trust. as
a lawless combination, the federal
government filed its long expected
suit for the dissolution OF the corpo-
ration The petition was filed by
Henry A. Wise, district attorney. in
The United States circuit court for the
Southern district OF New York.
One of the allegations is that the
late H O. Havemeyer, long head OF
the sugar combine, received $4,000,
900 common stock of the National
Sugar Refining company of New Jer.
sey as gift at the time the cor
poration was formed to take into the
combine four independent concerns,
the National Sugar Refining company,
run by B. II. Howells, Son &, Co.; The
New York Sugar Refining company
of Long Island City, N. Y, operated
by Claus Doshern; the Mollenhauer
Sugar Refining company of Brooklyn
and the w. j. McCahan Sugar Rein
ing company of Philadelphia. These
companies up to 1900 were independ-
ent and, it is sand, the American COM
pany was determined TO acquire them.
Under a plan lnaugurated by Mr..
Havemeyer, John e. Parsons and Jas.
Fl. Post, the National company was
formed aa1 took over the four plants,
Mr.. Post obtaining options on them.
When the new stock was delivered,
the petition sets forth, Post delivered
100000 shares OF common stock, the
entire issue, with par value of $10.-
100000, to MI. Havemeyer.
The government also alleges that
when the American company took
over the four Philadelphia companies,
the Franklin Sugar Refining company,
the Spreckles Sugar Refining company,
the Delaware Sugar House and the E.
c. Knight company, Mr.. Havemeyer
and his brother, Theodore Havemeyer,
bought As per cent of the stock of the
Spreckles company and then sold it at
large profit to the American com.
pany, of which both were directors.
II genera! the petition charges that
the defendants for some time past
had been and now are engaged in an
unlawful combination and conspiracy
to restrain the trade and commerce
among and between the several states
and territories of the United States
and with foreign nations, in raw sugar
sugar beets, refined sugar, molasses
syrups and other by-products OF raw
sugar and sugar beets, and to mon
/ opoliZe same. Such unlawful com
bination and conspiracy is the result
full acts extending over a period o
many years and participated In b.
defendants, respectively, in the mar
ner and to the extent hereinafter NOR
fully set forth. In participating in tn
various acts, agreements and comhin:
tons hereinafter described all Of tn
defendants have been actuated b
state and foreign trade and commerce
in raw and refined sugar and relate
articles, and to monopolize parts Their
Of"
The government charges that tt
American has obtained unfair adva
tage over competitors by obtainir
money on imports by customs fraud
by receiving rebate from railroads ar
by working in harmony with wholesa
grocers associations throughout I'll
country and keeping up the price
sugar.
A considerable portion Of the pc
ton is devoted to the acquisition
, the combine of the beet sugar plant
when that industry began to gro
formidable. In 1901 all these col
panies, except the Spreckles compan
!, which was a beet sugar concern, we
) independent.
At present, according to the pc
ton. the American company and
, subsidiaries control u per cent of t
J. total output of refined sugar In Il
!. country. which is said to be enough
! permit it absolutely to control price
: after meeting certain amount of CO.
petition.
4 ~ - - /. E.