New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-06-23
M0RM0NS IN BEET SOGAR
Henry O. Havemeyer's Deal WIN
the Church Explained.
TRUST CONTROLS UTAH Gu.

Mr.. Taft Made No Ante Election
Pledges Not to Disturb
Tariff on Sugar.
Washington. June 22.-ln1uiry hi'o ~
| lationshlp between the Mormon Chur'" "''D
! the American Sugar Reiinlns
| begun to-day before the House
of inquiry into the Sugar trust S"V"
that Henry O. Havemcyers Hrs, "oa
| in the beet sugar business were WIN '"o
Utah Sugar Company, in which the MOI
mon Church was interested.
Thomas r. Cutler. Of salt Lake N'oc-
president and general manager OF 'ic Ia"
Idaho Sugar Refining CompahS "'" "
former bishop Of the Mormon 'hurc", az
peared as a witness. lie SAID llat VI NV
approximately 100000 paid-up STOCK u
tho Ttah-ldaho company the AMER io'I'
Sugar Refining Company controls Sf'"'0'"'
or $1,000 shares; Joseph +. smith presi-
dent Of the Mormon Church. as trustee LOT
the Church. 1856 shares: the estate OF
Henry o. Havemeyer 2S.17i shares. ana Inc
remainder IS owned by 1.fS 1hdlViou'i
stockholders. Mr.. Smith, who has pee'l
summoned az a witness. sent word TO-DAY
that he was on his way to Washington ana
would arrive here on Monday, TO supple
ment the testimony given by Mr. cutler
who will continue before the committee To-
morrow.
Mr. Cutler told the early history Of tn
beet sugar Industry In Utah, dating back
many years up to the time of the organ
1889. and the Idaho Company. in 1903. The
Mormon Church became interested, first
by Endorsing notes Of the original company
and purchasing bonds. and later was IN
duced 10 buy stock, he said. Representa-
tive Garrett, of Tennessee. who examined
Mr. Cutler, asked about the first entrance
of Mr. IIavemeyer into the affairs Of the
company.
In 1902" said the witness, Il first met
Henry o. ITavemeyer'
did you approach him. or did he APP
proach you?" asked Mr.. Garrett.
Mr.. Havemeyer Proposed Deal.
Mr. TTavemeyer approached me-" was
tho reply. and il was for different pur-
pose than was generally supposed | had
been hunting capital for years for the
sugar interests in which We were interest
ed. and had been I'm the East many times.
Mr. Uavemever had heard OF me, and he
sent an agent 10 Utah to sec ME. He sent
william T. Wiletts 7 was Just going to
California. and Mr. Wiletts accompanied
mo there and arranged for me to go to
New York to see Mr.. Havcmeyer.
II went TO New York, and although Mr..
Io only I mot nj
that time. Judged that he was negotiat-
ing FOR tho American Sugar Refining Com
panv. because he used the word we I'm
all his conversation.
"Mr. Hayemeyer said to ne: We have
decided TO go into the beet sugar business.
We think II is bound to become one or the
great industries Of this country. and we
have heard OF your success in the west.
We sent for you to see II you couldn't help
us in establishing beet sugar plants In any
good locations in the United States
'T told Mr.. Havemeyer that was not in
n position to accept such proposition ana
said that what | wanted was ilnancial heip
in our own enterprises. Then ne maze q
proposition to me to supply half or all the
! carItal we wouG need in extending our
business I'm good locations n we would
agree 10 furnish the other half. and ne pro-
posed. TO start the deal, that our stock
holders sell the American company one
half OF our company"
Mr.. Cutler explained that this was taken
I'D with the stockholders and after he had
made six trims between New York and titan
With Mr.. Hayemeyer the deal was closed.
The COMMITTEES had just begun its eNamina-
ton OF the witness, when adjournment was
taken for the day.
Beet Sugar in Michigan.
Tho committee finished the examination
Of charles Il. Warren. president or lne
Michigan Sugar Refining Company. Dur
ing his examination ex-senator Rhrro"S'
Of Michigan. was referred 10. chairman
Itarawick asked II Mr.. Burrows IN tariH
speech in the Senate in 1909 had NOT as
s,,red the Senate" that tho American sugar
| Refining Company had nothinG'to 90 WIN
,be Michigan Sugar Refining company ana
had read a letter TO that effect from onlcers
Of the latter company.
Senator Burrows never made such
statement in the Senate" Mr. Warren re
n,,ed "nor did he read any letter from the
Michigan Sugar Refining Company on the
| floor OF the Senate"
"Did Senator Burrows say that the Amer
loan Sugar Refining Company had no IN
| terest I'm the Michigan company con-
tinued the chairman.
| ,T don't think he made such n state
mont" said Mr.. Warren. Il think he read
letters from other beet sugar companies IN
Michigan denying that the American COM
nar,. had an interest in them OF our conf
many. he said it was controlled by Mlcll-
-, mo, that il was managed by local peo-
- o,d that was not denying that the
or,c,n companv had stock in the COM
| pany.' r,,,;.
Regarding negotiations as to the Philip-
ntro tariff. Representative Fordney' OF
| Michigan. explained that he and others III
! Congress had conferred with Mr.. Idit DC
tore his inauguration. lie said the CONF
,romisc in the Payne-Aldrich law limiting
tho importation of Philippine sugar Tree oil
| d,tv In 2OODD tons was approved Dy the
beet sugar people.
"N,r taft agreed To it and was very
o,v,ous for such a compromise said Mr..
Fordney. -
Mr.. Warren was asked regarding the
.,gar tariff conferences with the President.
mid Won come to Washington to see Mr..
Taft?" asked Mr.. Hardwick.
Tho year before the caniPa'Rh' Sdlu
Mr. Warren, Il came in response To an
invitation. with +. ID. stair ana Ihillp
| Mcmillan. OF Detroit TO meet secretary
Taft a, dinner. Philippine sugar matters
' ere DISGUISED.
No Pledges Made by Mr.. Taft.
WAS there any understanding reached
that in the event Of Mr. rats election to
tho Presidency the tariff on sugar would