The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1910-12-01
.---------------<-~~ - 49,
SUGAR TRUST SUIT
Government Moves to Dis.
solve Company.
CALLED lANLESS COMBINATION
Violation of the Sherman Antitrust
law is Alleged and Relief is
Asked-Havemeyer Accused
of Fraud.

VI 4 AuuGs
New York, Nov. % - The federal
government began one of its most inn
portant actions against great corpora
tons which are said to have violated
the Sherman antitrust law.
Henry A. Wise. United States dis
trict attorney, fled in the United
States district court for the southern
district OF New York a petition asking
for the dissolution OF the American
Sugar Refining company and twenty
nine other corporations which compose
the so-called sugar trust.
The petition charges an Illegal com
bination in restraint OF trade. and asks
from the court relief in whatever form
may be necessary. including receiy-
ership. If deemed advisable.
The thirty companies composing the
sugar combine have an aggregate cap
italiEatioR Of $23O.0O0.O0O and control
large percentage OF the output Of
sugar in this country. The petition
charges that for years the companies
have violated the law, and have OPP
pressed competitors and ground them
out OF existence. Railroad rebates and
customs frauds are mentioned as de
vices which were employed TO raise
the combine to the commanding posi-
ton which it occupies.
The present suit. which. it is esti-
mated, will be in the courts for two
years before final adjudication is
reached, is expected to rank in i'm
portance with those of the government
against the Standard OIL company and
the American Tobacco company. which
are now pending in the supreme court.
Opposed to the government in the
struggle will be some OF the most
memorable corporation lawyers OF the
country James VI Beck. formerly OF
Philadelphia, former assistant United
States attorney general and now coun-
sci for the American Sugar Refining
company. will lead the attack on the
governments position. Mr.. Beck said
that the sugar combine was not a mo-
nopoly. but that il ii appeared. when
the supreme court interpreted the
Sherman law in the tobacco and oil
cases. that the sugar company was in
any respect violating the law, steps
would be taken Immediately TO COM
ply with the Jaw as thus interpreted.
The governments petition is a
lengthy one. occupying 22l printed
pages. and is a sweeping arraignment
of the defendant companies.
Alleged 100000 Gift.
One OF the allegations is that the
late H. o. Havemeyer, of New York.
long the head of the sugar combine.
received slOOOO.OOO common stock Of
the National Sugar Refining Company
of New Jersey. as a gift at the time
the corporation 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. y. Y,
operated by Claus DOsher; the Molten
hauer Sugar Refining company. Of
Brooklyn. and the w. J. McCahan Su-
gar Refining company. Of Philadelphia.
These companies up TO 1900 were
independent. and, 1t is said, the Amer
lean company was determined to &C
quire them. Under a plan inaugurated
by Mr. Havemeyer. John r. Parsons
and James H. Post, the National com
pany was formed and took over the
four plants, Mr.. Post obtaining options
on them. When the new stock was de-
livered. the petition sets forth, Poet
delivered 100000 shares of common
stock. the entire issue. with a par
value of $10.0O0,00O. to Mrs. Hayemey-
er. The petition says that those shares
were issued In the first instance con-
tTary to law, In violation Of the cor
poraton's franchise, and for no con-
sideration. as both said Post and Have
meyer then we'll knew"
The government also alleges that
when the American company took over
four Philadelphia companies-the
Franklin Sugar Refining company. the
Spreckels Sugar Refining company, the
Delaware Sugar house and the Z. G.
Knight company-Mr. Havemeyer and
his brother, Theodore Havemeyer,
bought 45 per cent of the stock OF the
Spreckels company, and then sold it
at large profit to the American COM
pany, Of which both were directors.
In general, the petition charges that
the defendants for some time past
have been, and are now engaged in IN
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. molassos,
syrups and other by-products of IAN
sugar and sugar beets and to mono6J
lie the sane. Such unlawful combina-
ton and conspiracy is the result and
outgrowth OF a series Of wrongful acts
extending over q period of many years
and participated in by defendants. re-
spectively. IN the manner and to the
extent hereinafter more fully set forth.
In participating in the various act5,
agreements and combinations herein
after descr' oed all Of the defendants
have been sotuated by wrongful intent
to restrain said interstate and foreign
trade and commerce in raw and refined
sugar and related articles, and to mo
nopoliZe paris thereof"