The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1901-06-21
MONNETT'S
HARD RAP
Replies to Archbold's
Testimony.
TRUST BEAT A JUDGE
II Worked Against 6radbury's .
Eleetion--Says Government
Can Alone Check Abuses
Of the Sta ndar


Washington, June 1.-THE indus.
trial commission received and will
print as . part Of its permanent re-
port a number Of affidavits making
reply to the testimony OF Mr.. John
ID. FArchbold, OF the Standard OIL COM
pany. before the commission In 1893.
These affidavits are by Hon. +. 8. Mon.
nett. former attorney general Of Ohio;
James w. Lee, Of the Pure Oil COM
pany; M. L. Lockwood and Charles
s. Matthews, Of Buffalo. N. Y.
Mr.. Matthews testimony relates to
the operations Of the Vacuum Oil
company. which he seeks to demon.
strate is q branch Of the Standard Oil
company. Mr.. Lee says that 1t Is not
true that he ever admitted that the
Pure Oil company Is itself trust or
that he attempted to sell any Of his
independent oil company interests TO
the Standard company. Mr.. Lock
wood submits affidavits to substan-
tiate his statement before the com
mission to the effect that the Stand
ard company was at one time putting
oil in tanks to be shipped to Germany
for 2 cents gallon, while people In
Texas and Arkansas. where there was
no competition, were paying rs cents
O gallon. Mr.. Archbold had said
there was not o word OF truth in this
statement.
Mr.. Monnett's statement is gen.
eral reply to Mr.. Archbold's testi,
mony so tar as 1t applies to the op-
erations of the Standard company n
Ohio. He says that not only the
Standard company. but other oil COM
10 Dinn In a
company, the Ohio Oil company and
the Solar Refining company connect.
ed with It. Each and every one haze
openly AMI notoriously violated their
charter and have violated Lne statutes
Of the state, criminally and civilly,
and are now so violating them. and
did not dare to come into court and
answer the charges Of such viola
ton"
He says that the charges openly
made ani not contradicted, the influ.
ence OF these companies defeated
Joseph p. Bradbury for the supreme
court OF the state because he was
supposed to be antagonistic to them
he also charged that they have open
ly and notoriously evaded the taxes
due the state by making returns upon
their property, In many instances es
timated at less than 10 per cent oi
its real value. considering the earn
ing capacity Of the property"
He asserts that the company has
evaded instead of courted invesiga
tion of his bribery charges. and he
adds:
Through their pipe line charges
and by means Of their monopoly In
transportation the Standard Oil com
binations continue their monopoly In
handling oil in Ohio, as every con
sumer Of oil In this state can verify
by his pocketbook.
Campaigns come and go; commits
sions investigate and legislatures
meet and adjourn, and magazine arti
cles are written and read. and yet
through thelg monopolistic and Grim
inal exactions. the Standard OIL com
binations OF transportation and dis
tribution thereof. levy tribute upoI
the owner of the oil rock and exac
from the consumer Of the refined OF
and its by-prOducts this unnatura
profit. The public are its victims
the little band OF law %iolat0rs own
ing the controlling sheres are tn,
benehclaries Of the plunder. Th'
public for q short time stand aghas
at their very boldness and defiance
The government alone can checl
their abuses"