The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-05

ly they and not the Standard Oil Com pany should be made the object of att tack
 ''The commissioner is peculiarly un- fortunate on the subject of Rebates. The public may we'll take his word that he. made an exhaustive examination and yet withai he says that with one or two exceptions the inves- tigation of the bureau have as yet discovered no rebates in the technical sense on interstate business These exceptions were on business done whoi. ly within the State of Californa, over which of course MT. Garfeld's bureau nor the interstate commerce commits sion have any Jurisdiction. But in those cases the alleged rebates were fully explained to Mir. Garfield and involved no turpitude whatever. It was new business on the Pacific and before it had been systematized there oil Company alone but to every one engaged in the enterprise which over- charges were subsequently adjusted
 He says the ,ro ol cSompany roads and is now receiving Secret rates and other unjust and Illegal dis. criminations. It Is hardly fair or man. course there may be other secret rates which the bureau has not discovered
 Tn dealing with the discriminations which are alleged to be yioiasionS as ,.sr Q. answer is that if MT. GarfIeld's state-- ment Is correct 1t was the duty Of the interstate commerce commission to alone aTns tieeI the standard % oii % Company but the. railway companies involved to book. and this they have never done: do not fall within the jurisdicticn of the bureau of corporations and any statement on the part of Mir. Garfield respecting this subject Is gratutious and valueless.
 Discrimfaations are Denied.
 Again, he has no control whatever over State rates, which by the law are put under the jurisdiction of the State authorities and over which the Bureau of Commerce nor the Interstate Com- merce Commission have no control. But, all of this aside, there have been no secret rates nor unlawful discrim- nations in the interest of the Stand ard oil Company. Take the ease of the rate from Whiting to East St. Louis, uon which he lays so much stress. :. While discussing it at great length as an important find he qualities and ex- plains 1t all by the statement that Whit ing was a suburb of Chicago, within the switching district of that city and that all freight rates from Whiting had for rnany years been the same as those from Chicago.
 This practice had obtained for twefi- ty years and had applied to all kinds of merchandise and to say that rate that had been used thus freely and openly for that period by every one was secret rate Is manifestly unfair. Moreover, our oil refinery is the only one at whiting or within 100 miles Of 1t. so that the so-cal1ed discrimination clearly could not have worked any harm to any competitor shipping oil from Whiting or It's vicinity.
 Mir. Garfield's claim that by the use of low lntra-state rates the Standard oil Company gained an unfair advant- age is equally unfortunate. At great expenee we constructed pipe lines from the Pennsylvania and Ohio fields and from the Kansas and Indian Territory | fields to Whiting. If our competitors did not do the same thing, should 1t be said that any one is unfaiar who does not give them the dvantage of this en- terprise of ours?
 Used the State Rates. Tt Is quite true that having our oil at Whiting and desiring to transport 1t to points in the interior of Illinois we used the State rates. To say that q man in Ohio who had never expended dollar for pipe line to Whiting should be able to transport his oil to an inland town in Illinois over an all-rail line at the same rates that we enjoyed by reason of our pipe lines, must np- pear absurd to any one. Are we to have no advantage because we con- structed these pipe lines7 Is the amount invested and the interest on that investment to count for nothing
 Take two men going to Boston, one uses an ,$S,000 automobile to go to New London and there takes the train. Is he to have no advantage in rate from the man who leaves New York and travels all the way by rail?
 The case of a shipment from New
 made Is susceptible of like explana- tion.
 Respecting the use of private cars of which MT. Garfield makes much, it Is only necessary to make answer in his own words. He says that owing to the relatively slow movement of tank cars in the petroleum oil trade, the appear to result in an excessive profit to the private tank car owner.
 "It is asserted over and over again in the report that the Standard oil Company profited by secret and 'un- lawful freight rates. Yet in the same connection it is admitted in the report that all of these rates are covered by tariffs flied with the interstate com merce commission precisely as the law provides and therefore cannot be either secret or unlawful
 The commissioner uses the cur ious phrase at one point in his report that although a tarif or rate had been filed with the (interstate) commission in compliance with the terms of the law, none but the favored shipper may know of it's existence.' As the in terstate law explicitly provides that every tariff of rates so filed must be posted at every freight station and open to the inspection Of every shipper, 1t Is hard to conceive of the commits sioner's temerity in making such an ut terance.
 The Presidents Mistake. The presidents message complains of the way in which the law is evaded by treating as state commerce what Is in reality merely part of Inter state commerce although the forms of law may be compiled with Yet this very method of making a through rate by a combination of two separate state rates has been held to be by the inter state commerce commission as lawful and proper
 '"rhe statement that the Standard Oil Company has largely, by unfair and unlawful methods. crushed out home competitions Is fully answered by the fact that home competition has always aWta aA fa