The San Francisco call., 1906-03-25
STANDARD OIL C0NFESSES
TO HADLEY' Or MISSOURI
Admits the Ownership of Stock in
Two independent Companies.


who is the president of the Standard
Oil Company of Indiana?"
ID. A. Moffatt, think"
Do you know Walter C. Teagle?"
Yes
You said before that Mr.. Teagie was in
some foreign business. Is that in connec-
tion with the Standard Oil?'
Il understand so''
Where is Mr.. Moffatt's Officer?
4 believe tits at 26 Broadway.
Did you never have a conference with
Mr.. Moffatt there?"
Il have"
Was it on business connected with the
business of the Standard Oil Company of
Indiana, and did you meet him at 26
Broadway"
Il presume that it was; I don't recall
now"
You know of the existence of the
Waters-Pierce Oil Company of Missouri,
do you not?
L have heard of it," replied Rogers.
Hadley then read question asked
at the previous hearing, which charged
that the Waters-Pierce Company and
the Republic Oil Company and the
standard Oil Company of Indiana Were
doing business in Missouri in violation
of that States antitrust law.
Is 1t not fact that the stock OF
these three companies is held by the
Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
or by some person or persons In trust
FOR it for combination, trust, con-
federation or agreement the Attorney
General asked.
My knowledge is extremely limited
as to such Details answered Rogers.
ADMITS TRUST OWNERSHIP.
Judge johnson, one of the attorneys
!, la<af1
1t noted on the record that the Standard
Oil Company would admit that the stock
of the Republic Oil Company and the
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and the
Standard Oil Company of Indiana was
held in trust by the Standard Oil Com
pany of New Jersey.
Judge Johnson added that the admis-
sion was made for the purpose of the
present litigation.
Judge Priest, also counsel for the
Standard Oil Company, said the stock
showing on the stock book of the Wat
ers- Pierce Company as standing in the
name of NJ. NJ. Van Buren, was held in
the interests of the Standard Oil Com
pany of New Jersey and that they made
that admission for the purpose of this
litigation.
Il don't suppose the stock is held for
the purpose of this litigation observed
Attorney General Hadley.
No, the admission is made for the
purpose of this litigation" replied
Judge Priest
The Standard Oil attorneys had the
admissions noted on the Tecord and
Judge Priest said it was understood, of
course. that these admissions were
made subject to an exception as to their
materiality, to be passed upon by the
higher courts. fY-s
Attorney General Hadley then said he
wished 1t understood that these admis-
sions of stock ownership covered the
period of time named in the informa-
tfon. The trust attorneys agreed to this
and made a new adnissien thatssfor the /
purpose of this litigation only, ftwould |
he admitted that majority of the |
stock of the Standard Oil Company of |
Indiana and all the stock of the Re- |
public Oil Company was held an the |
interests of the Standard Oil Company |
of New Jersey.
HADLEY CHANGES THE WORDING.
Strike out the word interests, de-
,nanded Hadley, and make it read held |
for the Standard Oil Company of New |
jersey"
Very we'll replied Judge Priest.
with a smile. make it read that way. |
And we also admit for the purpose of
this litigation only, subject to excep
llon, tnaI all the STOCK OF the waters
Pierce Oil Company standing in the
name of NJ M. Van Buren is held In
the interests of the Standard Oil Com
pany of New Jersey"
Strike out that word Interests
again interrupted the Attorney General.
and make it read held for the Stand /
ard Oil Company of New Jersey and
also L want the admission to read that
the stock is now held as admitted and |
was also so held during the time named
in the information and complaint
The change and admission were
recorded as Hadley asked.
MIR. Rogers resumed Hadley, have