The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-06-25
ME-. CUTLER S TESTIMONY.


Washington is. in the main, n straight
forward, clear story, giving the facts
as 10 the effort toward sugar making
in Utah from The beginning. or course.
there arc q good many details that Mr..
Cutler has not given, and that might
not be Illuminating on the inquiry at
hand, But, rs far as is told, his tes'
timony appears TO be candid and true.
The efforts which he makes to show
that there is no division Of territory,
and that the local trust here is free
in It's operations. and that the prices
arc made from he west coast, are sub
lcct 10 certain restrictions. As Ia the
territory, Mr.. Cutler expressly admits,
while denying that there is a territory
reserved TO the local sugar trust that
there is such a division when he says
that ''freight rates keep him Have,
meyorl out Of our territory. A letter
printed in The Tribune some years ago
from Mr.. Cutler set this forth in detail
! The territory reserved TO the local
sugar trust includes Utah, Idaho. Wyo-
ming, and Montana. The surplus sugar
made by the local trust is not sent
west, as one might infer from Mr.. Cut
Ter s testimony. but is sent TO Chica 90.
| The joint ownership is with the east
ern and not with the western concern
1T is true also TINT there is in this
market all the time cane sugar to be
| had by those who wish it. This cane
bn la
iIavomeyer trust, and not from the
West from the Spreckels trust.
With respect to the prices, the raise
here from $3.50 per hundred to Sc
per hundred by the local trust was
made simply because there is no way
to prevent it. The sugar trust in the
East will not undersell the local sugar
trust, and the local sugar trust, making
more sugar than it cal sell within its
territory, sends the surplus to Chicago
for sale, paying the freight and selling
in the open market there at about 81
per hundred, whereas it charges SIS per
hundred here to local consumers.
AS to the freedom of action on the
part of the local sugar trust, il is only
necessary TO refer TO the fact that
some years ago the local sugar trust
made positive agreement with the
people of Gunnison to put in beet
sugar factory at that place All ar
rangements were, as supposed, made.
The Gunnison people did what was re-
quired of them in the way of pledging
the cultivation of beets, and met every
other requirement Of the local sugar
company. But, and this was expressly
admitted by the local sugar officials.
the affiliated control in the East
vetoed the proposition, and prevented
the construction of the beet sugar fac
tory at Guunison
An amusing feature Of Mr. Cutters
testimony was his continuous insist
ence that Mr.. Havemeyer's advice and
consent were sought from time to time,
but that his advice was never fol
lowed. This, in view of the testimony
given by all OF the officials of the
big sugar trust, that Mr. Havemeyer
was the dominating influence in the
sugar business throughout, is rather
a comical position for Mr.. Cutler to
take.
However, as we said in the first
place, Mr.. Cutler 8 testimony is un-
doubtedly meant to he honest and
straig ghtforward He could, of his own
motion. add considerable amount Of
interesting detail, but it is doubtful
If there is any one on the committee
or advising the committee, who is suf.
ficiently conversant with the facts TO
bring out the inner details that would
be of interest and Importance What
the people bere would like to know e1-
actly is the number of times that the
local sugar stock has been watered. the
amount of that watering, the dividends
op the original basis and on the wa
tered basis, and things Of that kind
Mr.. Cutler was unkind to the farmers
in representing that he had difficulty
with them from time to time as to
prices for heets, although not sen.
sationally serious, in the combination
OF the farmers for the purpose of bet
teriDg prices, and The conditions of
raising, transporting and selling the
sugar beets which they raise, TO the
factories. Here also there might be
some interesting testimony brought
forward, if any one there were
in the position to inquire keen.
~ into the facts; and some Of
the farmers could give pertinent
evidence, The truth is, as Mr. Cutler
says, that from time TO time there is
a disposition manifested on the part
of the farmers who raise beets to get
better return for their product than
they receive. Formerly they received
substantially hundred weight of sugar
for d ton of beets; now they receive
but seventy-five pounds. The farmers
are naturally restive under this change |
to their disadvantage, but the "coun-
sell" comes authoritatively to them to !
-.