The Miller press. [volume] (Miller, S.D.) 190?-current, 1911-06-22
CLEANED UP HALF-MilLlCN BY
SELLING CANE PLANT TO
FIRST TRUST
FOUGHT FOR EXISTANCE
Certain Agreement Abolished When
~Penitentiary Menaced.-WooIen
Trust Is De-
PENDANT,

Washington, D. C.-The story of
the birth of the beet sugar industry in
America, its trials and temptations
ers were enriched by more than half
a million dollars profit through the
little transaction" of selling their cane
sugar refinery in Brooklyn to the first
sugar trust in 1887, were the fea-
lures in the testimony that Henry L.
Oxnard gave TO the house sugar in
v~estigating committee.
Mr.. OXnard assigned as his reason
for attempting to introduce the max
ing of sugar from beets in this coun-
try the sale to the trust" of his re-
finery at Brooklyn and his belief that
the introduction of the beet sugar in
dustry would be profitable and patri-
otto" He described the building of
the first factories and then tolG the
story of the organization Of the Amer
lean Beet Sugar company.
OF that 500, 900, 900 company he said,
the Oxnard Brothers at one time own
ed 60 per cent, but now possess only
three per cent He would not admit
that this stock was watered, testifying
that the valuation of the property was
about $4,000, 900 while the preferred
stock today was worth about s.. 000.-
900 and the common about $500, 900.
He was unable to tell why the capital
iZation was fixed at $4,000, 900, saying
tl,4 .L-4 49, ~ .n--s -. >,
Admits Sharp Rivalry.
The relations of the beet sugar in
dustry, and particularly the American
Beet Sugar company with the Ameri-
a Sugar Refining company was the
subject of many questions.
Representative Madison asked Mr..
Oxnard IF in reality the American
Sugar Refining company had not tried
to use it's power in 1901 to drive the
beet sugar refiners out of business by
unfair competition, that is. cutting
prices below cost In the Missouri riv-
er territory"
At first the answer vas indefinite,
but finally the witness said: Il think
it is a fair presumption that it was de-
signed. to drive us out"
Mr.. Oxnard said that the only time
the American Beet Sugar company had
any agreement with the American Su-
gar Refining company was in 1902,
when the former became the selling
agency of the latter. That contract
was cancelled. he said, when Wayne
MacVeagh, a lawyer, in 1906, gave an
opinion that it would send them to the
penitentiary if they continued IL.
He protested against the reduction
of the tariff on raw sugar but added
that he would leave it to the "~refners'
to fight for the duty on refined sugar.
American WOODEN Co. Defended.
Defense of the American Wooden
company, a resolution for the ~investi-
cation of which is pending. was made
in the house by Representative Weeks
of Massachusetts, who declared that
the company could not be considered
a trust under any definition of monop-
oily he had ever heard.
The wooden schedule occupied the
house all day. Representative Weeks
and ~Longworth We're among those
who spoke against the bill, and Rep
resentatives Macon and Oldfield, both
of Arkansas, and Ayres of New York,
for it.
THE American Wooden company
said Mr.. Weeks, lin no way controls
more than Is per ent of the indus.
try of the country. 1t does not con.
troll the price of wooden products in
this country nor the price of the labor
employed by the industry. 1t has new,
er paid exorbitant profits, is not con
trolled by ~millionaires and has never
sold its products abroad cheaper than
at home. The people are getting
the benefit of competition in the wool
en- industry"
Mr.. Weeks declared that the stock
Of the company was distributed amons
1850 holders, the average holdins
being only So shares.