Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-09-08
STANDARD OIL co.
Testimony Of the Vice President,
Mr.. Archbold.
INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION HEARING
Discrimination Through Inter
state Railroads Denied.
THE CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT

The Standard Oil Company was today the
subject of consideration by the industrial
commission, whea it met in the Bliss build
Ing. Mr.. John D. Archbold, vice president
of the Standard Oil Company in New York,
was the witness on the stand.
| Mr.. Archbold stated that he would like
| to reply to statements of former witnesses
| before the commission before entering upon
| a further examination. He referred to the
| testimony of Mr. Lee, the representative of
| the independent oil companies in Pennsyl-
| vania, and said Mr.. Lee and his associates
| form a trust Of the worst kind and In many
| respects go further than other so-called
| trusts.
| Chairman Phillips arose and said he de-
| sired to make a statement in view Of what
| had been said.
Chairman Phillips Statement.
| 81 am connected now" said Mr.. Phillips,
with combination and my name appears
| in connection with combination formed
under the laws of the state of New Jersey.
| Under the existing order we are forced into
| combinations in order to do business.
am perfectly willing to come under any
restrictive legislation that Is good for the
whole people in governing these combina-
| lions or trusts My connection with this
| combination is public and understood. l
| was in the state of New Jersey last week
| in connection with combination there
and l am trustee in it, stated
| Mr.. Phillips is considered as perhaps the
most extensive operator among the indie
pendent oil producers.
The witness said he merely referred to
this to show the tendency toward COM
bination today and not in criticism He
continued to analyze the testimony of Mr..
Lee. and spoke at some length in regard
to discriminatory rates. He said the Stand
a I'd ha6 mar
shipper could do. He read a large number
OF letters from officials of leading railroads
Of the country, these letters saying that
no discrimination of rates Is allowed the
Standard Oil Company over any other ship
per of oil.
No Interstate Discrimination.
Mr.. Archbold said the Standard Oil Com
pany Is not opposed to the interstate COM
merce law as 1t believes that uniform
rates of transportation would be desirable.
The greatest prosperity of the Standard
OIL Company in business had been realized
since the interstate commerce law went
into effect. He was sure that the Standard
Oil Company in no way receives preferen-
tial rates, directly or indirectly. Before he
interstate commerce act was passed spe-
cial contracts We're made. but the Standard
had advantage in these contracts not
enjoyed by others.
THAT the Standard Oil Company could
have secured discriminating rates since the
interstate commerce law has gone into eff
feet is probably true said Mr.. Archbold,
but the Standard Oil has not done it. 1t
knew that it was too shining a mark to do
so even if it were SO inclined, which it was
not"
There may have been some railroads
wholly within single state that have made
special rates for the Standard OIL but he
knew of no such case. His positive denial
of discriminating rates was particularly adj
dressed to interstate railroads.
The witness in his testimony made the
direct charge that Chairman Phillips of the
commission and others connected with the
independent oil business under the name
of the Pure Oil Company had approached
the Standard Oil Company with a PROPOSE
tiori that they divide territory in the oil
business. His statement was in reply to
Mr. Lees testimony to the effect that the
Standard had approached the Independent
companies with propositions to buy them
out.
Persistently Declined.
1--WE persistently declined to consider any
such combination said Mr.. Archbold. ION
the ground that 1t would have been illegal,
| and because Of our unwillingness to enter
| into business relations with them because
of our lack of faith in them.
II make" he said, 1.-The greatest possible
denial of Mr.. Lees statement that we have
gone to them. and l make the statement
that they have up to the period of your
sittings here approached US on this ques-
ton
Mr. Phillips-"Do you mean to include
all of them?''
Mr. Archbold-'I mean including all of
them and gentlemen l have not named"
| Mr. Phillips-"Have any persons ap-
preached the Independent companies, COM
| ing direct from your Office to solicit selling
their INTEREST,""
Mr. Archbold-"No, sir. I say broadly
| the approaches have been made from the
other side of the case"
Representative Livingston-"Was that a
written proposition?"
Mr.. Archbold-"No. all verbal. You don't
get that company to make written PROPOSE
TONS
preached by a large number of these per-
sons in any unfair or unjust way?"
Mr.. Archbold-'I do not say so. It may
have seemed entirely fair from their point
Of view, but it was not to be entertained"
Mr.. Philips-''Was 1t not to make some
| fair, honorable. just contract that would
allow us to live? Was 1t not to allow us
to live?"
The witness said that Mr.. Phillips COM
pany wanted a division of the oil business
| whereupon Mr.. Phillips asked:
Was 1t not privilege to handle the
business according to the capacity of the
Mr. Archbold: eve had no faith in the
proposition. but we We're unwilling to en-
terrain It, not only because of it's ilIegaity
but because of our lack of faith in the in
question about my answer. You Cooking
at Mr.. Phillips) came to us seeking this
combination and we declined it. That is my
statement, and you dare not deny it. 1t is
true"
Chairman Phillips arose, and, addressing
the commission, said: Il will state that
there were persons connected with this
commission who went there, but did not go
there to make any Illegal propositions
Mr. Smyth objected to the chairman of
| the commission giving testimony.
1 Mr. sQ,,f T no,
the Witness"
Mr. Smyth-"You should take the stand
as a Witness
Mr.. A. L. Harris of Ohio objected to per
sonalities in the testimony. Facts should
be stated.
Representative Livingston said that the
| discussion about the way the examination
should be conducted should be in private
session.
Mr. Phillips said he desired only to make
his explanation that 1t might go to the
public at the same time the statement of
| the witness was put out.
The witness in denying one statement
| that had been made by Mr.. Lee, counsel
| for the Independent oil producers, said it
was false and the witness knew it was
| false when he made it.
Would Mean Death in tho South