New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-07-20

-'SN theS NOW CoHtIOlitu. Inc WltucbS
thought the outcome OF the National suit
was too speculative 70 warrant any such
deductions.
Couldn't Answer Madison's Question.
Look what would be arrayed against
you II this combination were accom-
plished," said Mr.. Madison, 1.-The Ar
buckle. the Federal and two or three
other independent companies, all stand
Ing alone. the output Of no one Of which
is more than 100000 barrels Of sugar a
year. as compared with 100000 by
your company. Don't you think that a
tremendous economical situation Is con-
fronting the country In this respect and
that very great responsibility will rest
upon your shoulders, or perhaps
greater responsibility upon Congress TO
reach out and prevent the formation of
such a formidable organization, In the
interests of the people of the United
States who consume the product"
The witness said the committeeman
suggested such a large and important
question that he hardly felt competent
TO answer IT. He added however. that
he believed the peoples interests de-
pended largely on the kind of hands
into which the control Of large corpora
tons fell.
In answer to other questions by Con-
gresham Madison the witness stated he
understood that the late II. o. Have
meyer had withdrawn large part OF
his interests in the cane sugar business
and invested II in the beet sugar indus
try The American company had sold
S12 100000 of its $50 100000 Of stock In
the sugar beet refneries he said. Some
s., O0O. 600 Of this amount had been sold
before Mr. Havemeyer's death. The wit
ness said he understood that Horace
Havemeyer. son Of the late president of
the company. now controlled the beet
sugar stock in his fathers estate.
Mr. Thomas had already testified that
he and other directors of the company
were I'm favor Of the removal Of the
tariff on sugar. and said that the cane
sugar industry would be benefited and
the beet sugar business badly crippled
under such conditions.
II was suggested that the American
company in selling its beet sugar stock
was prompted by the hope that tho
tariff would be taken off sugar. thereby
crushing the beet sugar industry and
giving il absolute control OF the cane
sugar industry in this country
Mr. Thomas insisted that the company
did not wish 70 dispose entirely Of its
beet sugar stock, but only to reduce it.
The company thought il was good pol
icv 70 retain substantial interest in
both industries, he said, SO as to be
fairly safe whichever way the tariff
should be A situation might arise
under the recent decision of the United
States Supreme Court whereby It would
be good public policy TO dispose Of some
of the beet sugar stock. the witness do
Clared.
Said Agreement Was Within Law.
During the examination Of the witness
by Congressman II. NJ Jacoway it was
brought ont that John r. Parsons and
James NJ. Beck. as counsel for the COM
pany. had advised that a certain selling
and price fixing agreement in 1903 be
tween the American Beet Sugar Com
pany and the American Sugar Refining
Company was not in violation OF the
Sherman anti trust law. although Wayne
NIacVeagh. counsel for the beet people,
had advised il was and declared those
concerned would all go to jail if they op-
Grated under It. The agreement was
abandoned, and it was about that time
that Mr. Havemeyer sold some Of his
beet sugar stock. IT was said
In answer TO repeated inquiries by
different committeeman Mr.. Thomas sold
he knew nothing about a committee Of
three which had been appointed by Mr..
Havemeyer, as appeared on the minutes
of the meetings of the board Of directors.
TO acquire competing beet sugar prop
critics. Congressman Raker, Of Call
fornia, IN looking over the minutes found
an entry which showed Mr.. Thomas had
been present at the meeting when the
committee in question was appointed.
When asked about 1t by Mr.. Raker, the
witness then said he must have known
something about It at the time, but he
could not remember it.
Representative George r. Malby cited
two periods Of time when the price OF
sugar did not correspond with the re-
duction of the tariff. or free trade. He
rot the witness to admit that crop con-
ditions entered very largely as a factor
in fixing the price Of sugar.
80 you agree with me pretty we'll"
said Mr.. Malby, that the price Is de-
pendent on supply and demand"--
And the tariff" Mr.. Thomas quickly
fnterposed, creating a laugh among the
other committeeman.
CONGRESSMAN Sulzer also had a short
session with the witness. Mr.. Sulzer
seemed we'll contented with an answer
from the witness that II the duty were
wholly removed from sugar It would I'M
doubtedly tend to lower its price TO the
consumer.
NAV NIT E0REEIT R0N0S