The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-07-21

Parsons. | was counsel for many OF
them. | was counsel for II O. Have,
never, Theodore A. Havemeyer and
John Searles,' -,
"Who suggested to you the idea OF
bringing these Independent companies IN
1887 into the Sugar Rehneries com
paHnyi"u n, :. ,s IN al their
minds. I'm the man, though, who de-
serves the credit or the blame for ae
tually forming that company, which,
under reorganization, because OF the
sherman antitrust law, became the
present American Sugar Refining com
uauv. thoroughly believe in the COM
bination of capital, of labor and any
other interest for the benefit OF those
interested when 1T is legal
The First Combination.
"There were twenty-thrce rehnerles
in the United States at that time ana
Won welded seventeen of them into the
sugar refneries company Of 1887, said
Mr.. Garrett.
UCan YOU tell me what efforts were
made to get N the other rehnerles
tsThe only man who can tell you Is
now dead That Is John E. Searles,
Glow long did the rchneries COM
pany lasti'
ffThe change in its affairs began
when a political party brought s9it 20
disorcanize the North River Refinery
company - said Mr.. Parsons,
"What partyi" cried most of the
congressman.
1--WE call it Tammany Hall. ~
Then ali Of them wanted to know
1Weu, that was about the opening
shot of a political party against the
trusts, and both parties have kept 1T
up ever srce, ThaI's why | am nc
COCO DaIty man n ny
The court. Mr.. Parsons said, dis
solved the North River company be-
cause it was a corporation and had no
right to ioi- a partnership. which was
the form Of the sugar refineries com
rany.
Declared Illegal.
Mr.. Parsons explained how John E.
Searles had paid 100000 for the $780,
600 North River property and disman-
tied the refinery. Then Searles, "after
killing the North River company's ac-
tual self" entered it as a partner in
the sugar refneries company. This
the court Of appeals declared to be IL
legal, thus "killing a body that had
already committed suicide"
90 YOU Set, tOuLiuucu -uI, u al
sons, Hthere is even a lot Of bun.
combe in our own highest court
"Was there not, - he was asked, ga
great deal of water in the first 50,000,-
| 900 stock Of the American Sugar Re
hning companyS'
"If The refneries obtaining the trust
certificates were worth what they were
Naid, then there was no water. IF you
ask me if the actual properties of the
new company could have been sold in
the open market for $50,00000e I will
tell YOU nc. But to the new company
they were worth what was paid for
them rs matter OF policy and bust.
ness,
Mr. Garret had spoken of the policy
of the company in paying about 200 per
cent in trust certificates on 100 per
cent Of actual or stock valuation of
acquired re6neries.
| Mr.. Parsons then went into a long
dissertation on the combinations of
capital, which he strongly favored, con.
demning the federal government for its
interference with such combinations
and declaring that Great Britain was
prosperous because of its non restraint
of trade, He was also against the
Sherman antitrust law, and was only
lukewarm in approval of the interstate
| commerce laws
"I thoroughly approve of the recent
Standard Oil and American Tobacco
! trust cases where the supreme court
read reasonable into the law said
Mr., Parsons. "Otherwise there would
have been the worst panic this country
ever knew
This precipitated an argument, in
which the witness said this decision
would make it impossible TO enforce
the criminal clause of the Sherman act
Finally Mr.. Parsons said, under pres
sure that he received $500 stock certifi.
Gates of a par value Of $3.50, 900 for his
services in forming the original Sugar
Refneries company.
81 wanted cash. but those who in.
sisted on my taking Stock he said
s'were wiser. because the certificates
were worth more than par
Never leave home ON a journey with.
| ont h0ff1o Of Cha