The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1912-02-27


ruin OF tho many sugar concerns
which had not yet succumbed.
Second, Il was believed that the
operation Of a number Of rennorles
under a single management would re.
suit, and in fact Il did result, in many
economies.
zone OF the most important gains
resulting from such cancellations
was the opportunity thus afforded to
better the conditions under which
employees worked
"All these changes have greatly re-
duced the cost OF production of re-
fined sugar, of which the public has
had the advantage"
AS regards the charges Of combina-
ton and monopoly the answer states:
"The defendants deny that the
American Sugar Refining Company in
January, 1891, or at any ether time,
has been a combination in material or
unreasonable or undue restraint of in
terstate or foreign trade and com
merce in sugar, or that it has monop-
olized or attempted to monopolize
such trade and commerce"
These defendants deny that of the
entire sugar business of the United
States existing in January, 1891, it &C
quired more than 80 per cent, and
they aver the fact to be that prior in
March, 1892, the American Sugar Re
fining Company carried on not to eX-
coed .65 per cent of the then entire
business of manufactured refined
sugar and the resulting by-products in
the United States. And they aver that
at the present time said company re-
fines not to exceed about 40 per cent
of the total amount of refined or man
ufactured sugar produced in the
United States.
/ THE answer denies that there was
at any time any restraint exercised,
or that it controlled the policy of the
/ Western Sugar Refining Company, or
that its profits were anything but rea-
sonable and continues:
, These defendants admit that one
half of the capital stock of the said
Western Sugar Refining Company has
at all times been owned and held by
Claus, John D. and Adolph b. Spreck-
els, or by the latter two, and that one
half of said capital stock was held by
the American Sugar Refining Com
pany when the petition herein was
filed, and had been held and voted by
that company since 1891.
But these defendants aver that on
or about the 18th day of September
1911, the defendant, the American
Sugar Refining Company, sold and de
! livered to the said defendants, John
, d. Spreckels and Adolph b. Spreck-
els, all the capital stock OF said
Western Sugar Refining Company
heretofore held and owned by said
the American Sugar Refining Com
pany, and thereby parted with all in
terest of every nature whatsoever in
Sdlu WS5IClu sugar hSuhluS hOIl
pany, and these defendants deny thai
at the present time said the Ameri
can Sugar Refining Company holds
any of the stock of said Western
Sugar Refining Company or has any
interest in or connection with said
last named company whatsoever"
Regarding the purchase of sugar re
fineries in Philadelphia, including the
Spreckels and Delaware houses, the
answer denies that the acquisitions
were made in furtherance of plan tC
obtain monopoly or to decrease pro
duction, stating that on the other
hand, although the Franklin refinery
has beeen held as a reserve plant
fully equipped and ready to start al
moments notice.
Concerning the American Sugar Re
fining Company's connection with the
Pennsylvania Sugar Refining Com
pany matter, the Pennsylvania beine
the company promoted by Adolph Sc
gal, and in which George II. Earle
Jr., was afterward concerned as re
ceiver the answer says:
these defendants deny that Gus
tav r. Kissel and the then directors
and officers of the American Sugar
Refining Company, or either, or any
of them or said company by itself, sci
about to, or during the years 1904
1905, 1906, did involve said Adolph Sc