The Washington times., 1911-06-14
FOUNDER SEIOWNTO
IANELOOTEDTRUST
Hardwick Committee Told How Havemeyer Manipulated
- Corporations Stock to Enhance His Per-
..'.. -. -. sonal Fortunes
CONTINUED from First Pagel

CContinued from First Page)
tenough to control the price on refined
lgugsrs?"
'I don't know"
Witness said the first organization, of
1881. was abandoned because of a New
York suit. The new form was then
developed under New Jersey law;
stock of the new company, $50,0OO,000.
being exchanged for the certificates Of
the old. A z per cent cumulative divi-
stock, but in fact both organizations
always paid dividends, the later COM
pany on both common ad preferred.
He Didn't Know.
who is now living that can tell the
inside financial history Of these trans
Rctions?" was asked.
II don't know; maybe Mr.. John E.
Parsons or Mr.. Thomas"
Can you tell what was paid for the
Spreckels refinery in Philadelphia"
Ten million dollars"
"And what the property was WORTH"
mo, 1 can't tell that. Mr.. Searles
handled all that business.
I Mr.. Heike was asked If the trust did
not loan money. through a dummy, to
the Baltimore Sugar Refining Company
in such manner that the Baltimore
company was ignorant Of the source
from which 1t came. He said he did
The four Philadelphia companies
were the most important competitors OF
the trust. They were bought by ex-
changing stock Of the trust. All four
were bought at the same time. They
were the Delaware, Franklin, Knight,
and Spreckels.
From the minutes of the trust was
produced the record OF the purchase OF
Do1 n
market by Theodore and H. o. Have
meyer. This was later bought by the
trust, giving 1t control of the company
for S1Sl, 900.
These records were also put in, show
ing that the trust later ordered an in
crease of the stock of the Baltimore
company to add TO its capacity: The
plant later burned, and we rebuilt 1t, in
1893 or 1884, said Mr.. Heike. 1t was
not in operation at the time"
= Forgets Again.
WAS it ever operated after the Amer
ican owned it?'
"I don't know"
WAS it ever operated after it was
rebuilt"
No"
why not?"
Because the bigger refneries at Phil
adelphia could supply that territory toI
better advantage" /
TO show that the trust bought 5000
shares of the Waiienhauer Sugar Com
panies "a minority by exchanging trust
stock for IT.
1894 between James H. Post, the How |
ellis, Havemeyers and others to meet at
times and agree on the amounts of su-
gar TO be bought, refined, where mar |
Reted, etc.?'' !
81 never heard of IT.
Asked about the United States Sugar |
Refining Company. Mr.. Heike said the |
trust bought Z before its plant was I'm |
ished and paid cash. 1t was never op-
Couldn't Remember.
WAS it bought to suppress fits con1pe- |
tition?"
''I do not know"
''No-never." |
lieil<e said the plant was in bad To-
cation, but the trust paid $4,000 for it. !
It was at Camden, n. j., and the trust |
ONLY recently sold the land and build |
ings, which are now used for a soap |
factory.
Does the American control the Ma
tiona. Sugar Refining Ccmpany?'
ON, no. 1t holds S5,0oO,0oO preferred
stock. put the National has s20.oOO,OOO !
StCCR. Jam IS II. POST Is us piSoNSHl.
DO YOU know whether any stockhold- |
ers of the American also own stock in
the National?"
The newspapers say the Havemeyer
family does"
How much stock did Mr.. Have
never hold in the American when he !
dfed?'
Didn't Know.
1T was very small. 1 don't know
how much"
Heike said the 1900 shares Of Mollen-
bauer stock bought by The trust were
later exchanged for 1900 shares of the
National This proceeding had the ef-
feet of tying up in a community of
interest all three companies.
1t developed that the $10,o0O0Oo Of
common stock of the National Sugar
Refining Company is being attacked by
the trust on the ground that 1t was
issued to Havemeyer and his associates
absolutely without consideration.
IF that common stoCk-Sl0, 100000 of |
it-should be held illegal, then the