The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-03-21
STANDARD OIL METHODS
GEORGE RICE EXAMINED ny THE At
TORNEY GENERAL OF OHIO.
Effort to show that the Buckeye Pine
Line Company II still Member
of the Great Oil Trust


NEW YORK, March 20.--Eliott and Kline
counsel for the Standard Oil Company. sent
a letter to Attorney General Monnett. of
Ohio, to-day, demanding that he make
public the name OF the man who offered
him a bride 10 discontinue the fight. on
March 4 inst. George Rice announced that
a bride of S5Oo00. less a hundred thousand
dollars commission. had been offered Mon
nett 10 induce him 10 stop or delay pro-
ceedings against the Standard Oil Company
now pending in the Supreme Court of Ohio.
With reference to the letter written to him
by Messrs. Elliott and Kline. Attorney Gen
eral Monnett said he would reply 10 ii aft
er he had consulted with the Supreme Court
of Ohio.
A hearing in the case OF the State of
Ohio against the Buckeye PHI ne Com
pany was begun this afternoon re office
of Commissioner c. Edgar Mills ae hear
ing was held that the attorney general
might take dispositions in the proceedings
brought in Ohio to annul the charter of the
Buckeye Pipeline Company for violation
of the antitrust laws of Ohio. The claim
of the prosecution is that the Standard OIL
Trust still exists and that despite the law
the Buckeye Pipeline Company is still a
member of it. The Buckeye Pipeline Com
pany was organized for the transportation
OF crude OIL Its headquarters are at Lima.
o., and its capital stock is 100000. Fl. III.
Rogers is the president. AT the proceedings
to-day NJ. F. Elliott and Virgil p. Kline
represented the company. Attorney General
Monnet appeared for the State of Ohio. w.
L. Flagg acted as his assistant.
AS a preliminary to the inquiry Messrs.
Elliott and Kline agreed to admit a copy
of the testimony given in October last by
John d. Rockefeller in the Standard oil
Company case, provided the Ohio court
should decide that such evidence was COM
petent. Counsel objected, however, holding
that such testimony was not competent.
Mr.. Monnett offered the original letter
press copies of the letters referred to in the
testimony of George Rice, taken at Column
r. Pool, of the Standard Oil Company, to
s. c. T. Dodd and to Nj. F. Elliott. They
were placed on record, with the objection
OF counsel that they were incompetent and
irrelevant.
GEORGE RICE'S TESTIMONY
George Rice was the first witness called.
Mr.. Flagg asked him if he ever owned
certificate of the Standard Oil Trust and he
answered yes. Counsel objected that the
question and answer were Irrelevant be-
cause the whole matter had been decided in
the proceedings taken in Columbus. Coun-
sci offered like objections to all other ques-
tons asked.
Under the law the commissioner has no
power TO rule on such objections and coun-
sci made them only for show on the record.
The witness identified two certificates one
certificate of the Standard Oil Trust and the
other certificate of assignment of legal
title as his property and both original GER
tifcates.
Have you ever owned trust certificate
of the kind called certificate of equitable
interest which you handed into the trust
and for which you received a certificate
asked Mr.. Flagg.
Mr.. Rice said he could not reply unless
given an opportunity to explain and Mr.
t'lagg asked: Did you ever hand into the
trust a certificate for which you received
stock of constituted company"
Mr.. Rice said yes and again asked to
be allowed to explain Mr.. Flag held him
down n to yes or mo- answer, and coun-
sci for the pipeline protested. saying: Mr.
FIagg, you are hot treating our client
Mr.. Flagg asked an explanation of the
exchange of stock certificates and Mr.. Rice
showed that at the dissolution of the trust
he received in place of his original certifi-
cate or stock a certificate of assignment of
legal title which entitled him to MS propor-
ton OF the property owned by the twenty
different companies represented i'm the trust
The last certificate conveyed to me aid
Mr.. Rice, IAN equitable interest in the prop
erty owned by the trust; the second con-
TO whom did you present the certificate
, supposed TO convey the legal iitle?"
Il did not present ii. 1t was presented
by my agent. Mr.. McKemper, to the liqui-
dating trustees.
What did you receive directly upon pre-
sentation of that certificate?''
Il received corporate scrip in nineteen diff
ferent constituent corporations and a paner
eckhC enlargement OF fractional interest in
the Anglo-American Oil Company, of Lon
| dom
Was not power Of attorney necessary
Don't you know you had to execute power
| or attorney before you got certificates?''
How many shares of trust certificates
were covered by the assignment of legal
ute you presented?'
What is the highest enumeration Of n
| fraction of a share in one of these con-
stltuent companies that you got?' asked
| Mr.. Flagg.
Gates and then replied: '.5OelO4 of $4,000 of
one share" He explained that the certifi-
/ Gates were the corporate scrip he had re-
/ ceiyed from the liquidating trustees.
Now. having stated much, will you
state if the Buckeye Pipeline Company
was a member of what is known as the
Standard Oil Trust?" asked Mr.. Flagg
How do you know?"
by its being represented in the corporate
| scrip. received from the liquidating trIIs-
| tees"
In answer to questions witness said he mad
| owned this corporate scrip about three
| years He had never received any dividends
| from any of it. None of the companies in
| which he received fractional shares upon
| surrender of the trust OF the trust cerfffi-
| cate paid dividends on such fractional
| shlTes. Besides this scrip. witness said he
| had six shares TepreSe nted by certificates of
| the Standard Oil Trust.
| Counsel for the pipeline company showed
| by the printed minutes that all the aues-
| tioEs propounded by Mr. Flagg had been
| asked and answered during the examination
| OF the witness in Columbus two weeks ago.
Mr. Kline asked the witness If he had not
Frf inst he ,loe.
! Oil Company and against the Buckeye Pipe
| line Company ON behalf OF Attorney Gem
| eral Monnett. Mr.. Rice said he had and In
| reply To- other questions said that his ex-
! penses lad been paid by the attorney gen
! eral. bat that he had not been paid for his
time, .or did he expect % paid for II.
| The hearing will be continued ia Mr.. Ml's
| Office tomorrow.
Ex-senator Nafsh's Funeral.
| AUGUSTA, Ga, March 20.-The funeral
1 If fx-SCuator Patrick Walsh took MAGE here