Pine Bluff daily graphic. (Pine Bluff, Ark.) 1893-1942, 1919-02-07
ADMITS PACKERS
CONTRIBUTED TO
AID POLITICIANS
Counsel Claims Taggart
and Colquett Aided.
JOINTLY OPPOSED
GOVT LEGISLATION
Several States Allotted To Each
Company for Supervisor.

Washington, Feb. 6.-Political CAM
paign contributions and legislative
activities of the five big meat pack
ing concerns were inquired into to-
day during cross examination of Hen
ry Veeder counsel for Swift and
Company, by Francis J. Heney, before
the Senate agriculture committee,
which is considering legislation for
the regulation of the meat industry.
Mr.. Veeder testified his company
had contributed to the campaign funds
of former representative Taggart Of
Kansas, in 1915, and to representative
Rodenberg, of Illinois, in 1912, After
the committee had adjourned tonight,
however, Mr.. Veeder issued state
ment saying that the $3.50 contrbu-
ton referred to, in connection with
Mr.. Rodenberg's campaign had been
paid to a committee working in be-
half Of the Rodenberg primary law in
Illinois," and had not been for Mr.
Rodenberg's own sampaign.
Aided Colquitt.
The witness also told the committee
that donation was made in 1910
to the campaign fund Of O. B. Col
quit, who became Governor of Texas
the following year. Bills for Eek
penses" in connection with a school
bond election at National City, ILL
nois, and the election of tax assess
or named Monroe, at the same place,
were paid, Mr.. Veeder said, because
of the large property interests of the
packers in that town.
I Mr.. Veeder said it was not the
policy of Swift and Company to give
financial aid to office seekers and
4 that everything possible was done to
avoid it. When Senator Gronna, OF
North Dakota, asked why the pack
ers did not report candidates seeking
contributions, Mr.. Veeder said the
packers would be glad if there was
a law preventing office holders "from
asking them for money"
Join Opposition.
In reply to questions the witness
said it was the practice of the five
big packing firms to oppose jointly
legislation in Washington and state
legislatures which they considered adj
verse to their interests. Several
states were allotted to each company
for supervision, he said, and the ex-
penses paid pro-rata when there was
necessity for the action. As rule,
these costs were assessed, according
to the witness, on the basis Of the vol
ume of beef business done by each
company. Massachusetts, New Jer-
sey, Texas, and Pennsylvania, were
among the states in which Mr.. Veeder
said the packers had conducted legis-
lative activities.
Denies FavOritism.
While Mr.. Veeder was testifying
before the Senate committee, w. A.
Glasgow, Jr., counsel for the food \
administration, fatty denied before
the House interstate commerce COM
mittee, that Food Administrator
Hoover had favored the packers as
charged by Edward C.. Lasater, Of
the National Livestock Associations
Executive committee and former head
Of the food administration livestock
and markets division.
Mr.. Glasgow also defended $1-a-
year men, employed by the food adj
ministration, who had been accused by
Mr.. Lasater Of carrying out the poll
cies Of the big packers. Mr.. Glasgow
said he had never come in contact
with more loyal and conscientious
group Of men.
Mr.. Veeder in reply to questions
by Mr.. Heney, said Swift and Com
4 pany's donation to the campaign fund
of former Representative Taggart was
SIZE; This was the company's share
! Continued on page five)
|