OCR Text |
Show New York Lawyer Claims to Be the Pioneer in Formation of American Trusts. B GAINS GREAT WEALTH H FROM CORPORATIONS Believes Government Cannot in 1 Equity Interfere in "Pri- 1 vate" Affairs. jH XEW YORK, July 21. The Amcri- can Sugar Rcfininc company contrih-fl contrih-fl utcd $10,000 io help Ben.inmin Ilarrl- son in one of his campaigns for the prcsidencv apainst Grovcr Cleveland. The contribution was told of by John E. Parsons, former attorney for the company, in his testimony before the congressional commiitee which is in-vestipating in-vestipating the affairs of the so-called trust. He could not remember whether Wm it was the first or second campaign. IH Dr. Parsons frankly boasted that he IH was the "pioneer in the formation of IH the American trust" and was proud WM of it, but .scouted the idea that the. IH - sugar trust constituted a monopoly such as the Standard Oil or American HH Tobacco companies. The committee spent the afternoon visitinc several sugar refineries in this Wm vifinity. and held informal conferences IH with many superintendents, but took IH no testimony. (.'. A. Spreckels is ex- IH pected to take the stand. Proud of His Work. . "I certainly claim to be the pioneer In the formation of the American trusts," s.-.Id Mr Parsons, in answer to another ijuc-iilon. I am very proud of It." Mr Parsons opposed -m federal incor-porailon incor-porailon law for local corporations, al-though al-though lie i aid such a law mtglit be benc-ficial benc-ficial for public service corporations He opposed the law which permits the Kovern-ment Kovern-ment to examine the books, question tlio officers and obtain the secrets of a cor-novation. cor-novation. ' I strongly condemn tho modern the-bry the-bry of publicity of corporation affairs," he ii In "It is unjust to the American citl-z"n citl-z"n -hat he fhoulcl be compelled so make his privntr; affairs; public." In re:;ly to questions by Mr. Sulzer, Mr Parons repudiated the many state-mcnts state-mcnts .vhih havo been made that II. O. Hiiicmever was the one power In the tugar trust ami that the board of dlrec-tor? dlrec-tor? .always did as he bade. 'T know personal y that Mr. Havemeyer consult Ml the board on Important mat-its mat-its Members nf the committee differed with him. Sometimes Mr. Havemeyer yielded, at other times the members yielded. Mi. Parsons Insisted that the American Sugar Refining company Is not r trust similar to the standard Oil and the American Tobacco company. He scouted the Idea that it was n monopoly. H' . Repre cniative Madison read into the rccorn Mtat after the American had ab- HB sorhM the Philadelphia refineries there wore three '.ndpendent reiinerles In New "Who organized the;;e three reflnerlo? PB into the National Sugar Uellning com- B pony?" H- Campaign Contributors. Jm Asked about the mysterious resolution about' campaign contributions to "quiet Injurious litigation., and "hurtful lepls- Ir.tlon." Mr. Parsons said he recalled bovine: been asko-I for advice if the wH company could make, such contributions. "I said the company had such a right to protect Its stockholders." said he, t "but I certainly wouldn't contribute to buy off prosecution. I only know of one nV political contribution. Thni was in one of the Harrison campaigns, when the company pave $10,000 to the treasurer of the Republican campaign committee." Mr. Parsons did not want to tell of his holdings .in the American companv. but JBJ finally explained that he received In all ')':. 2500 shares of a par value of $250,000, H''' for legal services. His salary besides f was about $10,000 a year. He now owns, j he said, only 240 shares of preferred j and 240 of common stock. Besides that B be received 1000 shares of the preferred T stock of the National company. He ro- M. reived $50,000 for his services in the V' Franklin refinery case. He refused to Bm say how much he received In the Pcnn- svlvania refineries case, as he Is one of A those under federal Indictment in that 1. affair. The government alleges thnt he received $100,000. |