# The History of the Standard Oil Company/Volume 2/Chapter 13

CHAPTER THIRTEEN
THE STANDARD OIL COMPANY AND POLITICS
THE cases described in the last two chapters naturally aroused intense interest in the Oil Regions. The two in Ohio demonstrated afresh the chief grievances which the oil men had against the Standard Oil Company since 1872—that they were securing rebates on their own shipments and drawbacks on those of their competitors. The Buffalo case demonstrated that when their ordinary advantages failed to get a rival out of the way they winked at methods which a jury called criminal. It was fresh proof of what the oil men had always claimed, that the Standard Oil Company was a conspiracy! At the same time that these cases were arousing their indignation anew there occurred in Ohio an affair which gave them new evidence of their old charge that the Standard was steadily intrenching itself ​in state and national politics in order to direct the course of legislation to suit itself. There had been many evidences of this, satisfactory enough to the initiated. There was no doubt that the investigation of 1876 and the first bill to regulate interstate commerce introduced at that time had been squelched largely through the efforts of two members of Congress, one of them directly and the other indirectly interested in the Standard—these were J. N. Camden of West Virginia, head of the Camden Consolidated Oil Company, now one of the constituent companies of the Standard Oil Trust, and H. B. Payne of Ohio, the father of the treasurer of the Standard, Oliver H. Payne. It had certainly used its influence to oppose the free pipe-line bill which the independent oil men had been fighting for since the early days of the industry. In 1878 and 1879, during the prosecution of the suits against the railroads and the Standard by the Petroleum Producers' Union, there had been incessant charge of the use of political influence to secure delay. It was a matter of constant comment in Ohio, New York and Pennsylvania that the Standard was active in all elections, and that it "stood in" with every ambitious young politician, that rarely did an able young lawyer get into office who was not retained by the Standard. The company seems to have taken a hand in politics even before the days of the South Improvement Company, for Mr. Payne once said in the United States Senate that when he was a candidate for the House of Representatives in 1871, "no association, no combination" in his district did more to bring about his defeat or spent so much money to accomplish it as the Standard Oil Company!
But all of the examples they quoted were more or less poor in evidence. Of no one of them perhaps could they have produced satisfactory proof. Now, however, simultaneously with the three cases outlined in the last two chapters there ​came a case of bribery in an election which they held established their charge. The case was the familiar one of the election of H. B. Payne of Ohio to the United States Senate in January, 1884. Mr. Payne was at the time of his election the aristocrat par excellence of Cleveland, Ohio. He had birth and education, distinction of manner and mind. His fine old mansion still remains one of the most distinguished houses in a city of beautiful homes. He had been active in Democratic politics for many years—a member of the state Senate and a member of Congress, and he had been mentioned as the Democratic candidate for the presidency in 1880, receiving eighty-one votes on the first ballot. At the time of his election to the Senate he was a man seventy-four years old. Now Mr. Payne's son, Oliver H. Payne, was one of the thirteen original members of the South Improvement Company, and one of the rare Cleveland refiners who had a strong enough stomach to go into the Standard Oil Company when it swept up the oil trade of Cleveland in 1872, and he had gathered in his share of the spoils of that raid. Oliver Payne was proud of his father, and it was well known that he wanted to see him in the Senate of the United States, but there had been no movement to nominate him, and in 1883 he seems to have made up his mind to see what he could do.
A United States Senator was to be elected in Ohio in November. In October a new State Legislature was chosen, and the Democratic members were instructed for one of two candidates for the Senate, George H. Pendleton or General Durbin Ward, both men of prominence and long service in the public life of the state. Mr. Payne's name was not mentioned in the canvass. Nevertheless, hardly had the Legislature convened when there sprang up at the Neil House in Columbus an extraordinary Payne boom. Its backers were Senator Payne's own son, Oliver H. Payne, at that time treasurer of the Standard Oil Company, and Colonel Thompson, ​a prominent personage in the same concern. Their lieutenants were also members of the company in one capacity or another. Large sums of money were alleged to have been circulated. There was a rumour that Oliver Payne said the election cost him $100,000. It was claimed that it could be proved that a check for $65,000 had been cashed in Cleveland by one of the men most prominent in the Payne boom, and that the whole sum had been spent in Columbus.
A perfect uproar of indignation followed the announcement of Mr. Payne's choice. All over the state the Standard Oil Company was charged with the election. The Democratic press was particularly bitter:
Said the Butler County Democrat: "It was simply a question whether Pendleton, Ward, Thurman, Converse, Follett, Geddes, or any other capable and honest Democrat, should receive the compliments of a seat in the Senate, or that the Standard Oil Company should buy the place for Henry B. Payne. It was an honest and divided Democracy against a hydra-headed dictatorship of rich men on whose banner was inscribed 'Money Talks.'"
The Carroll County Chronicle in commenting on the election said: "It is a great mistake to suppose Standard Oil has captured the Democratic party of Ohio. It may have captured a score or two of men elected to the Legislature, but they are not the Democracy of Ohio by a long shot. When the British got General Benedict Arnold they imagined they had captured the United States army, but it was a mistake."
"The monopoly of the Standard Oil Company must be destroyed," declared the Columbus Times. "Its intrusion into political circles must be prevented. There must be no later acceptance of this outrage. Political purity and perpetuity permit no complacency. These pernicious foreign elements must be eradicated, and until they are no Democrat will enter the capitol of Ohio or of the nation. The rottenness that uncovered itself last night has not its confines in Ohio."
The comments were not confined to papers of the state. The New York Sun, under the head "Was Payne's Election Bought?" said:
"The subjoined communication from a source which we always respect is worthy of more attention than is usually bestowed upon the animated expressions of those whose preferences have not been realised:
"'It is now believed, and I believe, that the Standard Oil Company recently bought ​with money Ohio's seat in the Senate of the United States for Mr. Payne. Now, can the social respectability of a man make such a crime respectable? Or is there to be one standard of political morality for Republicans and another for Democrats? Or are Democrats expected to condemn corruption only when practised by Republicans, and to condone, defend, and cover it up when practised by Democrats, or when it is found only in the Democratic party? In my opinion there is no danger so threatening to free institutions as the sale and purchase of political power, and nothing more to be condemned.'"
Although these charges were kept up for two years neither the Standard Oil Company, Mr. Payne, nor the Legislature which had elected him noticed them. The scandal became one of the issues of the next campaign and was instrumental in making the next Legislature of Ohio Republican. As soon as the new Legislature convened at the opening of 1886 an investigation of the Payne case was ordered. Some fifty-five witnesses were examined, and the resulting testimony turned over to the Senate of the United States for its examination. The testimony did not prove the charge of bribery, the Ohio Legislature said, but it was of such a nature as to require the Senate's attention. The matter went to the Senate Committee on Elections, and in July, 1886, a majority reported against the further investigation asked by the state of Ohio. Against this decision two members of the committee, Senators Hoar and Frye, protested:
"Is the Senate to deny to the people of a great state, speaking through their Legislature and their representative citizens, the only opportunity for a hearing of this momentous case which can exist under the constitution? We have not prejudged the case, nor do we mean to prejudge it. We sincerely trust that the investigation, which is as much demanded for the honour of the sitting members as for that of the Senate or the state of Ohio, may result in vindicating his title to his seat and the good name of the Legislature that elected him.
"How can a question of bribery ever be raised or ever be investigated if the arguents against this investigation prevail? You do not suppose that the men who bribe or the men who are bribed will volunteer to furnish evidence against themselves? You do not expect that impartial and unimpeachable witnesses will be present at the transaction? Ordinarily, of course, if a claim like this be brought to the attention of the Senate from a respectable quarter that a title to a seat here was obtained by corrupt means, the Senator concerned will hasten to demand an investigation. But that is wholly within his own discretion and does not affect the due mode of procedure by the Senate. From the nature of the case, the process of the Senate must compel the persons who conducted the canvass and the persons who made the election to appear and disclose what they know; and until that process issue, you must act upon such information only as is enough to cause inquiry in the ordinary affairs of life.
"The question now is not whether the case is proved; it is only whether it shall be inquired into. That has never yet been done. It cannot be done until the Senate issues its process. No unwilling witness has ever yet been compelled to testify; no process has gone out which could cross state lines. The Senate is now to determine, as the law of the present case and as the precedent for all future cases, as to the great crime of bribery—a crime which poisons the waters of republican liberty in the fountain—that the circumstances which here appear are not enough to demand its attention."
For three oppressive July days the Senate gave almost all of its time to a bitter debate on the report. The name of the Standard was freely used. "The Senate of the United States," said Senator Frye, "when the question comes before it as this has been presented, whether or not the great Standard Oil Company, the greatest monopoly to-day in the United States of America, a power which makes itself felt in every inch of territory in this whole republic, a power which controls business, railroads, men and things, shall also control here; whether that great body has put its hands upon a legislative body and undertaken to control, has controlled, and has elected a member of the United States Senate, that Senate, I say, cannot afford to sit silent and let not its voice be heard in an inquiry as to the truth of the allegation." The majority report was adopted, however, by a vote of forty-four to seven​teen. "The most unfortunate fact in the history of the Senate," said Senator Hoar.
For the time the matter rested, but only for the time. The failure to investigate rather intensified the convictions that Payne's seat was bought by the Standard Oil Company. In 1887 Mr. Payne voted against the Interstate Commerce Bill. "That is why he was put in the Senate," people said bitterly. The feeling became still more intense in 1888. The question of trusts was before Congress. The Republicans had come out with an anti-trust plank in their platform; the Democrats, in response to Mr. Cleveland's message, were declaring the tariff the greatest trust-builder in existence, and calling on their opponents for reform there if they were sincere in their anti-trust attitude. In this agitation the Standard Oil Company undoubtedly exerted its influence against all trust investigation and legislation. The charge became general that they were helping the Democrats. This is why they wanted a Democratic Senate. In September, 1888, when a phase of the question was before the Senate, Mr. Hoar, with his genius for asking far-reaching questions, said one day: "Is there a Standard Oil Trust in this country or not? … If there be such a trust, is it represented in the Cabinet at this moment? Is it represented in the Senate? Is it represented in the councils of any important political party in the country?"
It was the first time that Mr. Payne had been sufficiently aroused to reply. "There is nothing whatever to sustain the insinuation which the honourable Senator conveys. I make the declaration now for the first time, and it will be the last time I shall ever take notice of it. The Standard Oil Company is a very remarkable and wonderful institution. It has accomplished within the last twenty years of commercial enterprise what no other company or association of modern times ​has accomplished, but, Mr. President, I never had a dollar's interest in that company. I never owned a dollar of its stock; I never rendered it any service, and that company never rendered me any service. On the contrary, when a candidate for the other House in 1871, no institution, no association, no combination in my district did more to bring about my defeat and went to so large an expense in money to accomplish it as the Standard Oil Company…
"As a matter of fact, nine-tenths of the stockholders of the Standard Oil Company are now and always have been Republicans. Within my knowledge there are but two Democrats who have ever been stockholders in that company." Farther on Mr. Payne interpolated this irrelevant remark: "Not only are the majority Republicans, but they are very liberal in their philanthropic contributions to charities and benevolent works, and I venture the assertion that two gentlemen in that company have donated more money for philanthropic and for benevolent purposes than all the Republican members of the Senate put together."
Mr. Payne's denial was not sufficient to silence Senator Hoar. He returned to the attack. It was a "general public belief," he declared, that the Standard Oil Company was represented in the Cabinet and Senate. He called attention to the newspapers' charge to that effect, and declared that he had received many personal letters charging that the Standard was helping the Democrats. He asked for information when he asked his question; he made no charges. Mr. Whitney was the member of Mr. Cleveland's Cabinet to whom Senator Hoar referred, and he promptly, in a public letter, disclaimed all connection with the Standard Oil Company. Mr. Hoar said he "cheerfully accepted" the denial. As for Mr. Payne, he was not satisfied, and when Mr. Payne in heat replied to him, Senator Hoar closed his lips forever in a burst of biting sarcasm:
"A Senator who, when the Governor of his state, when both branches of the Legislature of his state complained to us that a seat in the United States Senate had been bought, when the other Senator from the state rose and told us that that was the belief of a very large majority of the people of Ohio without distinction of party, failed to rise in his place and ask for the investigation which would have put an end to those charges if they had been unfounded, sheltering himself behind the technicalities which were found by some gentlemen on both sides of this chamber, that the investigation ought not to be made, but who could have had it by the slightest request on his own part and then remained dumb, I think should forever after hold his peace… I think few men ever sat in the Senate who would refrain from demanding an investigation under such circumstances, even if it were not required by the Senate itself… There were Senators who thought that the admission of that Senator, the continuance of that Senator in his seat without investigation, indicated the low-water mark of the Senate of the United States itself."
And there the Payne case rested. It was never proved that the Standard Oil Company had contributed a cent to his election. It was never proved that his seat was bought, but the fact that, in the face of such serious charges, rehearsed constantly for four years, neither Mr. Payne nor the Standard Oil Company had done aught but keep quiet, convinced a large part of the country that the suspicion under which they rested was less damaging than the truth would be. In the minds of great numbers this silence was a confession of guilt. The Payne case certainly aggravated greatly the popular feeling that the Standard Oil Company was using the legislative bodies of the country in its own interest.
This feeling was intensified in 1887 by a terrific battle between the oil producers and Standard forces in the Legislature of the state of Pennsylvania. Since the compromise of 1880 the body of the oil producers had been taking no concerted action against the Standard. But their inaction was not due to reconciliation to Standard domination. As a matter of fact they were almost as bitter in 1886 as they had been in 1878, when they formed the Union which for two years ​fought so good a fight. The specific complaint of the oil producers at this time was that they were being "robbed" by the National Transit Company—the big Standard pipe-line consolidation, which had secured by the series of manoeuvres already outlined the monopoly of handling and transporting crude oil. If the oil producers had been making money at this time it is quite possible that they would have paid little attention to the profits of the National Transit Company. The service they got was about as perfect as any human machine could render, and they would probably have recognised this and been willing to pay high if they too had been prosperous. But the condition of the oil producer in these days was in glaring contrast to that of Mr. Rockefeller. They had piled up oil until there were in 1886 over 33,000,000 barrels on hand. Naturally this had driven prices down. The average price for the last years had been under a dollar a barrel. In 1886 it fell down to 71⅜, and everyone said it must go lower. Embittered and discouraged, the producers fell to comparing what they were getting out of the business with what Mr. Rockefeller was getting. It was not a consoling showing. The Standard Oil Trust had from its organisation in 1882 paid dividends on its $70,000,000 capital. In spite of the extraordinary outlay for tank-building and seaboard pipe-lines made from 1881 to 1884—$30,000,000 it is computed to have been—the trust paid 10½ per cent. in 1885, ten per cent, in 1886, and Standard Oil stock stood near 200! In contrast, the oil producer, in 1886, is estimated to have lost about six per cent. on his expenditures, and oil property depreciated one-third in value.
Something was wrong. They could not charge the Standard with the price of oil. As long as over 33,000,000 barrels in stock lay on the market it could not rise. But they could ​
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER
By Eastman Johnson
The enthusiasm with which the bill was greeted was cooled a little by the announcement that as it stood it was ​unconstitutional—acts to punish being forbidden by the constitution of the state—as well as by an immediate realisation that the prices fixed for services were in nearly every case less than cost. The bill was immediately amended. When it came back it was at once apparent that, in spite of this preliminary hitch, a tremendous fight to carry it was being organised by the oil men. Then determination to push it grew in proportion to the Standard opposition. The Standard, indeed, realised immediately that unless a hard fight was made the bill would go through by popular clamour, and they turned their big lawyer, Mr. Dodd, against it, set their newspapers—the Oil City Derrick, Titusville Herald and Bradford Era, all of them by this time subsidised organs—to argue against it, and sent Mr. Scheide, one of the ablest of their pipe-line managers, to present their side at Harrisburg. They also secured the services of a well-known young Republican member of the Legislature, Wallace Delemater, of Crawford County, one of the counties in the Oil Regions, to organise an opposition to the bill in the Legislature.
In February a hearing was given the bill, Mr. Dodd presenting the Standard side. It is rare that so able a lawyer has to fight so weak a measure, and Mr. Dodd riddled it easily. As a matter of fact the Billingsley Bill was as bad as it could be. It was characterised by all sorts of constitutional, legal and practical difficulties. The pipe-line business was an interstate business, and this bill attempted to regulate it—which evidently it could not do. It could, of course, regulate Pennsylvania oil, but, by so doing, it created two classes of oil in the lines, a situation which would have been confusing and undesirable. It was evidently intended that the prices it fixed should apply to the 30,000,000 barrels of stocks on hand, but these were held under contract, and could not be touched. There were many other objections to the bill. Even Judge Heydrick, the able lawyer whom the oil men ​had engaged to defend it, was obliged to apologise for it at every point, and its most valiant supporter, Senator Lewis Emery, Jr., said frankly that the framer of the bill knew too little of the oil men's needs to be able to make a bill, and that this would have to be thoroughly revised.
In spite of all the reasonable, indeed overwhelming, objections to the Billingsley Bill, the oil men clung to it. Mass-meetings were held nightly from one end of the region to the other, petitions flooded the Legislature, a big delegation was kept constantly in Harrisburg lobbying for it. The support was intemperate, bitter, unreasonable. In March it was intensified by the knowledge that a self-constituted committee of leading oil men were in New York treating with the Standard in regard to certain of the abuses the bill aimed to cure. These men felt that the Standard was unjust in its dealings with the oil men, excessive in its charges, and arbitrary in its service, but they felt that the confusion the Billingsley Bill would bring into the business more than offset the grievances it righted, and they had gone to Mr. Rockefeller to see if matters could not be compromised. Now nothing could have more effectually added to the warlike spirit abroad in the Oil Regions at that moment than the suggestion of a compromise. Their cause was being "sold." It was "compounding with felony," and when, after a three days' sitting in New York, the committee came home with an agreement from the National Transit Company, making certain concessions—as two per cent. instead of three for shrinkage, twenty-five cents a day per 1,000 barrels, instead of forty, for storage, and with a promise that certain other points should be settled by joint committees—two of the leading members were hung in effigy in Titusville!
In April the final vote on the Billingsley Bill came. Harrisburg was alive with oil men determined that the bill should go through. The Standard was present, and if it had ​less of a claque, it had more of the "sinews of war." Indeed, it was charged later by Senator Lewis Emery that the leader of the Standard forces in the Senate received $65,000 for his services—a charge which, so far as the writer knows, has never been either proved or disproved. The bill came to a vote after a passionate wrangle. It was defeated eighteen to twenty-five. A storm of violent protest from the oil men's representatives followed the defeat, and the lobbies, the hotels, and even the streets of Harrisburg were scenes in the next hours of bitter quarrels and excited gatherings. When finally the oil men withdrew from the town it was with the understanding that they were to meet two weeks later in Oil City to organise a new protective association. The protests and resolutions passed at their final gatherings foreshadowed no intention of reviving the Billingsley Bill. Indeed, the bill itself had received scant attention from them in the violent campaign over its passage which they had carried on for three months. All their passion had been expended on the Standard. This was a question of whether the Standard Oil Company ruled the Legislature of Pennsylvania or whether the people ruled it—so declared the oil men; and when their bill was defeated they charged it was by bribery, and henceforth quoted the defeat of the Billingsley Bill along with the Payne case as proof of the corrupt power of the Standard Oil Company in politics. Their outbreak, for it was nothing else, was the culmination of their indignation and resentment at fifteen years of unfair play on the part of the Standard Oil Company, of resentment at the South Improvement Company, at forced combination of refineries and pipe-lines, at railroad rebates and drawbacks, at the immediate shipment outrages, at the Tidewater defeat. It was revolt against the incessant pressure of Mr. Rockefeller's pitiless steel grip. It was bitterness at the idea that it was he who was reaping all the profit of a business in which they were taking the ​chief risks, and if things went on as they were that it was he who always would. Out of their burst of passion was to grow a solid determined effort, but for the moment they were defeated, and the defeat, which really was merited, was another added to their series of just and unjust complaints against Mr. Rockefeller.
All of these bitter and spectacular struggles aroused intense public interest. The debate on the Interstate Commerce Bill was contemporaneous with them—the bill was passed in 1887, and had its effect. The feeling grew all over the country that whatever the merits of these specific cases, there was danger in the mysterious organisation by which such immense fortunes and such excessive power could be built up on one side of an industry, while another side steadily lost money and power. A new trial was coming to Mr. Rockefeller, one much more serious than any trial for overt acts, for the very nature of his great creation was to be in question. It was a hard trial, for all John D. Rockefeller asked of the world by the year 1887 was to be let alone. He had completed one of the most perfect business organisations the world has ever seen, an organisation which handled practically all of a great natural product. His factories were the most perfect and were managed with the strictest economy. He owned outright the pipe-lines which transported the crude oil. His knowledge of the consuming power of the world was accurate, and he kept his output strictly within its limit. At the same time the great marketing machinery he had put in operation carried on an aggressive campaign for new markets. In China, Africa, South America, as well as in remote parts of Europe and the United States, Standard agents carried refined oil. The Standard Oil Company had been organised to do business, and if ever a company did business it was this one. From Mr. Rockefeller himself, sitting all day in his den, hidden from everybody but the ​remarkable body of directors and heads of departments which he had "acquired" as he wiped up one refinery and one pipe-line after another, to the humblest clerk in the office of the most remote marketing agency, everybody worked. There was not a lazy bone in the organisation, nor an incompetent hand, nor a stupid head. It was a machine where everybody was kept on his mettle by an extraordinary system of competition, where success met immediate recognition, where opportunity was wide as the world's craving for a good light to cheer its hours of darkness. The machine was pervaded and stimulated by the consciousness of its own power and prosperity. It was a great thing to belong to an organisation which always got what it wanted, and which was making money as no business in the country had ever made it.
What more, indeed, could Mr. Rockefeller ask than to be let alone? And why not let him alone? He had the ability to keep together the wide-spread interests he had acquired—not only to keep them together, but to unify and develop them; why not let him alone? Many people even in the Oil Regions were inclined to do so, some because they feared him—rumour said Mr. Rockefeller was vindictive and never forgot opposition; others because they were canny and foresaw that they might want his help one day; still others because criticism of success is an ungracious business and arouses a suspicion that the critic may be envious or bitter. But there were a few people, as there always are, whom no cowardice, no self-interest, no fear of public opinion could keep quiet, and these people insistently urged that the Standard Oil Company was a menace to the commerce of the country. We have been and are being wronged, they repeated. We have a right to do an independent business. Interference to drive us out is conspiracy. Let Mr. Rockefeller succeed in the oil business and he will attack other industries; he will have ​imitators. In fifty years a handful of men will own the country.
Mr. Rockefeller handled his critics with a skill bordering on genius. He ignored them. To see them, to answer them, called attention to them. He was too busy to answer them. "We do not talk much—we saw wood." This attitude of serene indifference is supremely wise. It belittles the critic and it gives the outsider who watches the game a feeling that a serenity so high must come from an impregnable position. There is no question but many a mouth opened to testify against the Standard Oil Company has been closed by Mr. Rockefeller's policy of silence. Only the few irreconcilables withstood his sphinx-like attitude, and yearly, from the compromising of 1880, these warnings and accusations were louder and more fierce. Probably the greatest trial Mr. Rockefeller has ever had has come from the persistency with which the few malcontents kept him before the public. They interfered with two of his great principles—"hide the profits" and "say nothing." It was they who had ruined the South Improvement Company; it was they who had indicted him for conspiracy and compelled him to compromise in 1880. It was they who now, after the splendid pipe-line organisation was completed and his market machinery was in order, kept up their agitation and their cursing. Their work began to tell. The feeling grew that the Standard Oil Company, or Trust, as it was by this time generally called, must be looked into. Even those who, dazzled by Mr. Rockefeller's achievement, were inclined to overlook its ethical side and to refuse to consider to what aggregation of power and abuse it might lead, began to feel that it would be quite as well to have the matter thrashed out, to have it settled once for all, whether the thing had been so bad in its making and was so dangerous in its tendencies as the "oil-shriekers" pretended. In the House of Representatives, when the question of ​ordering an investigation of trusts by the Committee on Manufactures was up in 1887, the liveliest concern was shown as to whether the Standard Oil Company, "the most important case" of all, would escape. More than one member asked to be assured before consenting to the investigation that the Standard would be put on the rack. The same interest was shown in the Senate of New York State, where an investigation was ordered for February, 1888. It was certain indeed now that Mr. Rockefeller would not be allowed much longer to work in the dark. He was to be dragged into the open, much as he might deplore it, to explain what his trust really was, to prove to a suspicious and hostile public that he had a right to exist.
* ↑ Congressional Globe, September 12, 1888, pages 8520-8604.
* ↑ Report Number 1490, United States Senate, Forty-ninth Congress. This report, and Miscellaneous Documents Number 106, United States Senate, Forty-ninth Congress, 1886, contain the evidence of bribery collected by the Ohio Legislature and the majority and minority reports of the committee.
* ↑ Congressional Globe, July, 1886.
* ↑ Congressional Globe, September, 1886, pages 8520-8604.
* ↑ See Appendix, Number 49. A statement from an oil-producer's stand-point for 1886.
* ↑ See Appendix, Number 50. The Billingsley Bill.