Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-01-07
HAS OIL MEN
ON THE RACK
Lively Time in Probing Stand
ards Affairs
IN NEW YORK YESTERDAY
Attorney General Hadley of Missouri
Inquisitor.
ROGERS IN SHARP DIALOGUE
Examination to Determine Whether
the Three Companies Are Allied in
Interests-Declined Answers.
IN NEW YORK YESTERDAY
ROGERS IN SHARP DIALOGUE

1t developed from the questions asked by
Attorney General Herbert S Hadley of Mis-
souri, oil Henry H. Rogers. vice president
and director of the Standard Oil Company
of New Jersey that one of Mr.. Hadleys
chief purposes in conducting an examina-
ton OF officers of that company in New
York before Commissioner Frederick Ii.
Sanborn is to find out whether that COM
p&ny owns a controlling interest in the
Standard Oil Company of Indiana, the Wa
ters-Pierce Oil Company of Missouri ana
the Republic Oil Company.
This. Mr.. IIadey said tonight, he regards
as a step in the direction of excluding ;he
tbree latter companies from doing business
in Missouri. To most OF the important
questions asked by Mr.. Hadley bearing di-
rectly on the question of stock ownership
Mr.. Rogers declined to give any answer,
"or the advice of counsel and Mr.. HadIey
requested Commissioner Frederick II. San
born to certify the questions and Nj.
Rogers refusal to the supreme court of this
state for determination as to whether or
not Mr. Rogers must answer them or ne
adjudged in contempt
Mr.. Rogers declined to reply to questions
as TO whether he controls any stock in the
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, whether NJ.
Van Buren, of New York holds a con.rolI-
ing Interest in that company for the Stand
ard Oil Company of New Jersey, whether
the New Jersey company controls the
Standard OIL Company of sndiana or the
Waters-Pierce Company and whether two
thirds of the dividends of the Waters Pierce
company are not paid to Ii. NJ. Tilford,
who. Mr.. Rogers said has an office at III
Broadway, this city.
Mr. Hadley tonight declared that he
would take all these questions to the su-
preme court of New York state to secure
an order for Mr.. Rogers TO show cause why
he shall not answer them.
Mr.. Rogers did say, however, that he
never heard of an agreement between the
Standard Oil Company of Indiana and the
Waters-Pierce Company to divide the trade
Of Missouri. and that he did not believe 1t
was ever made.
Mr. Hadley said afterward that he had
an luJuHCNlon against Sucn a DIVISION, Dut
that ne was unable. in Missouri. to show
from the officers OF the oil companies that
they are owned by the same party. This is
what he is aiming to show In the New York
LoarluE
MIR. RS today declined to answer the
question whether he had a transaction with
IT, Clay Pierce in 1894. by which Mr.
Rogers secured all or part of the Waters
Fierce Oil Company's stock for the Stand
ard OIL Company of New Jersey or for the
Indiana company.
Mr.. Rogers was still on the stand when
the hearing was adjourned until Monday.
After The Stars report closed yesterday
afternoon. when II. H. Rogers, vice presi-
dent and director OF the Standard OIL Com
pany was on the stand, the catechsine. of
the witness was continued.
Mr.. Rowe, his attorney advised Mr. Rop
ers not to answer certain questions Com
missioner Sanborn told Mr. Rowe not IN
interrupt. Mr.. Hagerman objected to the
questions and said he wanted the right of
MI HadIey to get at the list OF stock
holders of the company decided by the
courts. Mr. Hadley said the question bore
witness as showing his interest.
John d. Johnson of counsel for the con,-
panies said the state called Mr. Rogers and
should not question his credibilfty.
Il beg respectfully to be excused said
Mr. Rogers
Mr.. Hadley then asked that the question
ana refusal TO answer be certified to the
supreme court.
DO you know who owns a matoritv of
the stock of the Standard Oil Company of
lndiana?" asked Mr.. Hadley
Mr.. Rowe again advised Nr Rogers not
to answer and the commissioner told him
he would have to request him to leave the
room II he interrupted again. Mr. Rowe
said he knew his rights and would continue
10 advise the witness.
Ordered to Leave the Room.
The commissioner told him to leave the
room, but Mr.. Rowe declined TO do so.
The commissioner stopped proceedings and
said they would not go on unless Mr.. Rowe
left.
Il should like to be In his place" said
Mr.. Rogers.
Mr. Tadley suggested that Mr., Rowe he
allowed TO remain, but the commissioner
said he would consent only il Mr. Rowe
agreed 70 stop interrupting. At this point
the hearing adjourned until afternoon
commissioner Sanborn said, in resumins
after recess. that Mr. Rowe is personai
counsel for several witnesses and will be
allowed to sit near them and advise them.
He sat near Mr.. Rogers
The questions whether Mr. Rogers knows
VINO owns or holds a majority of the stock
o. that company was read. The commits
sioner requested him TO answer.
Mr.. Rogers declined Mr.. Hadley asked
II he declined because his answer might
subject him TO a criminal prosecution
Declined for Personal Reasons.
II have no conception of such a condi