Evening star., 1925-03-10
WARREN DEFENDED
AS SUGAR INDUSTRY
ROLE IS OUTLINED
CumminS Declares Nominee
Put Michigan Company on
Producing Basis.
SELECTION OF CABINET
HELD PRESIDENTS RIGHT
Reed and Walsh Lead in Attack
OH Confirming Choice for
Attorney General.

The dispute over Charles B. Warren's
nomination to be Attorney General was
resumed today in the Senate.
Chairman Cummins of the judiciary
committee defended the nominee against
the charges that have been brought
against him. while the burden of the
opposition was taken over by Senator
Reed. Democrat, Missouri, and Walsh,
Democrat, of Montana.
Opening the debate. Senator Cummins
declared the whole argument of those
who oppose confirmation rested on a
supposition that Mr.. Warren would not
faithfully execute the laws. Just be-
cause he had been faithful to one client
in private life, the Senator said, his
enemies appeared to believe he would
not be faithful to another.
IF he is an honest man." he con-
tinued. "he will execute the laws Of
the United States just as faithfully
and just as diligently as is in his
power"
Free Choice Urged.
Senator Cummins said the Presi-
dent should have "a free choice" in
the selection of members of his Of
ficial family. and should be held re-
of the law"
Reviewing Mr.. Warren's connection
with the sugar interests, the Iowa
senator declared the nominees sole
interest in the sugar interests was
to place the Michigan Sugar Company
on its feet SO that 1t could produce
sugar"
In my opinion" he continued, "a
combination intended to cheaper the
nn0f r.F
ton of the antitrust law except
when it stihes competition so that il
can fix the price"
Causes Are Cited.
Senator Cummins said 1t was urged
that Mr.. Warren was not a fit person
to become Attorney General, because
in 1902 he acted as counsel for per-
sons connected with the American
Sugar Refining Co. in the purchase of
a large amount of the stock of beet
sugar corporations In Michigan; that
in 1905 he participated in the organi-
zation of the Michigan Sugar Corpo-
ration, of which he became counsel
and afterward president, and that the
American Sugar Refining CO., to-
gether with the Michigan Sugar Co.
and certain other Individual defend
ants, of whom Mr.. Warren was one,
were prosecuted later by the Govern
ment for violation, of the Sherman
antitrust law.
Tn 1902" Senator Cummins said,
there were at least seven beet sugar
factories in the State Of Michigan,
owned by as many separate corpora
tons. Most Of them, probably all of
them save one, were losing money
in their operations.
Acted as Counsel.
About that time the American
Sugar Refining Co. or persons con-
nected with that corporation began
buying stock in some or all of these
Michigan corporations. Mr. Warren
acted as an attorney for the buyers
passing upon the validity of the cor
porate organization and the validity
of stocks being purchased
"A part and l think it may fairly
he said, large part, of the stock
SO purchased was issued or trans
ferred to Warren and he in turn
indorsed 1t in blank for delivery to
the purchasers"
This operation continued for about
four years until the American Sugar
Refining Co. or persons connected with
that company, notably H c. Have
meyer. owned about 81 per cent of the
stock of these Michigan companies
Their management, however, continued
to be inefficient and the results un-
profitable. In the meantime Mr.. War.
rem had acquired in his own right a
very considerable interest in the stock
In some Of these Michigan corpora
tions.
Brings On Consolidation.
"All this resulted in movement for
the consolidation of six Michigan COM
panfsS. which eliminated in 1906 in
the organization of the Michigan
Sugar Co.
Two men were selected from the
board of directors, or stockholders.
of each of these six Michigan com
panfes-men of considerable promi-
nence: and unqestioned integrity-to
make valuation of the properties of
these six companies. Mr.. Warren was
not member of this joint company.
When the valuation was completed.
all the properties of these companies
were transferred to- the Michigan
Sugar Co., and it Is not suggest
ed that there was any unfairness in
these valuations or that any stock
holder complained of the transaction.
These properties were paid for in
CONTINUED on Page 2, Column A. :