Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-05-05
STANDARD OIL RET6Rf
Sharp Reply TO the Presidents
Recent Message
BY ROGERS AND ARCHBOLD
In Charges Of Gross Unfairness Of
Gigantic Monopoly.
EXECUTIVE ADVICE RIDICULED
Mr.. Garfield Raped for His Exploita-
ton on the Subject Of Railway
Rates and Rebates.
EXECUTIVE ADVICE RIDICULED

kAOA Ou Luc SUBJECT x6allWay
Rates and Rebates.
In reply to President Roosevelts mes
sage and the report of Commissioner Gar
field, Messrs. H. H. Rogers and John D.
Archbold Of the Standard Oil Company
said yesterday in New York their examine
ton OF the message and report had neces-
sarily been hurried and that they should
at later date make a full answer to their
shareholders. Meanwhile they made the
following statement:
In the Presidents effort to secure the
passage Of bill charging the powers OF
the interstate commerce commission and
just and equitable railway rates We have
precisely the same interest that any good
citizen has: no more and no less. Regard
Ing his criticisms upon the management OF
the railways or his structures upon any
acts Of the interstate commerce commits
siion We have neither responsibility nor
concern. When, however, he or Commits
sloner Garfield attacks the Standard OIL
Company and uses Its methods Of doing
business as an object lesson for the pur-
pose Of promoting his views we protest.
ut may be frankly stated at the outset
that the Standard Oil Company has at all
times. within the limits Of fairness and
with due regard for the law, sought to Sc
cure the most advantageous freight rates
and routes possible. There will be no de-
NAL OF this fact on our part The question
is whether we have at any point violated
the law or the proprieties.
How the Inquiry Started.
THE present inquiry grew out OF a reso-
luton adopted by Congress a year ago
upon motion Of Mr.. Campbell Of Kansas
lnstructing the Secretary Of Commerce and
Labor to investigate the Oil business as
carried on in this country. We welcomed
the investigation. When Commissioner
Garfield in the discharge of his duty visited
our Office he and his experts were given
free access to our books and the fullest
opportunity to ascertain In the manner In
which our business was conducted. Frank
disclosures OF all Of our methods were
made and every criticism offered by him
was met with a candid and painstak1ng
answer.
so conscious were we Of our rectitude
that we repeatedly importuned Mr.. Garfield
to make public the conditions existing In
Kansas. but he refused We proposed our
selves to answer some of the unfair critl-
cism upon the subject, but refrained on Mr..
Garfield's advice and on his assurance that
his report would present the case fairly 1t
turned out that SO far as Kansas was con-
cerned the state authorities abandoned their
attack
"One does not care to handy words with
the President of the United States. 1t is
not easy to dtfferentiate between Mr.. Roose-
welt the President and Mr. Roosevelt the In
dividual. He has given of his advice
most generously upon every subject, from
the size Of our families to the mistake of
the federal Judges and some error Is inev-
fable now and then to the most conserva-
tive man under such circumstances.
Untruthful and Unjust.
I'VE say fatty that any assertion that the
Standard OH Company has been or is now
knowingly engaged in practices which are
unlawful is alike untruthful and unjust
THE commissioner report, upon which
the Presidents message Is based. opens
with the statement that the manufacture Of
refined OIL In this country is about 2e, coo, 600
barrels annually. 1t is unimportant, but 1t
would nevertheless have been fair for him
to have stated that more than 1900 600
barrels of this annual manufacture is ex-
ported, and with its manufacture or the
price the American public is not interested.
He next calls attention to the fact that
the Standard OH refineries are located at
centers of distribution, while the indepsnd-
ent refneries are usually in the crude oil
fields. This fact. IL borne steadily in mind
will answer very many of the criticisms
which he later INDUCES In. He charges that
this location of refineries and the natural
advantages following 1t were obtained by
beyond this assertion does not go into a his
tory or explanation OF these alleged unfair
methods at all. He says the development
of the pipe line system by the Standard Oil
Company was the result of special agree
ment with the railroad companies What
this can mean is past our comprehension
AS a matter of fact, the development of the
pipe line system by the Standard Oil Com
pany was in the face of violent hostility on
the part of the railroads, which naturally
We're opposed to the introduction of such
means of transportation At enormous cost
and in the face of steadfast railway onnosi-
ton at early date the Standard Oil Com
pany adopted the pipe line method for ham
ding crude petroleum. The first line was
extended from the western Pennsylvania oil
fields to Bergen Point, on the Atlantic coast
This line diverted an enormous amount of
freight from the railway companies which
fact they did not view with complacency.
The Matter of Favoritism.
Passing from this point, Commissioner
Garfield takes up the question of favorit-
ism, which he alleges has been shown by
various railroad corporations to the Stand
ard Oil Company. The first specific casa
Of alleged discrimination to which he d.
reefs attention Is in the New England ter
tory. 1t is charged that enjoy a
monopoly in certain parts of that section
because some of the railroads there refuse
to prorate. The man who could be de-
eeived by such a statement must be pretty
dense. FIRST, III the New England roads
ought to prorate but resuse to do so it
must occur to some one, somewhere, that
perhaps the New England roads and not
the Standard Oil Company are blameable
Second a very casual inquiry would show
that the New England roads are simply
doing what they are forced to do by
natural conditions, and that Mr.. Garfields
attack, to be effective. should be directed
TO Long Island Sound a means Of freight
communication.
obviously we have an advantage by the
use of our own pipe lines from the western
Oil fields to the coast and the use Of water
transportation thence to New England over
any one who uses all rail transportation
from western points But this advantage
is one which 1t Is not possible to correct
by any rate legislation. unless 1t is pro-
posed to bankrupt the railroads In order
to meet water competition. Yet we are not
alone In this method of transportation.
Some of our competitors do the same thing
and deliver oil at the points in New Eng
land that we do by the same process.
Would Blame Roads.
Mr.. Garfield claims that the refusal to
prorate on the part o fthe New England
railroads has given the Standard OIL Com
pany practical control Of New England
territory and enabled 1t to maintain ex-
orbitant prices for kenosene. Yet while 1t
10 admitted that the New Haven road has