The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1906-05-05


most conservative man under such al
In their statement Messrs. Rogers and
Archbod say that the examination OF
the message and report had necessarily
been hurried, and that at later date they
should make a full answer TO the share
holders. Meanwhile they make the fol-
lowing explanation TO the public:
TRUST DISCOVERS MOTIVE.
"In the presidents effort TO secure the
passage OF a bill enlarging the powers OF
the Interstate commerce commission and
Ist and equitable railway rates we have
ecisely the same interest that any good
tizen has-no more and no less Re-
gardng his criticisms upon the manage
Inent OF the railways or his structures
upon any acts OF the interstate commerce
commission we have neither responsibility
nor concern.
when, however, he or Commissioner
Garfield attacks the Standard OIL COM
pany and uses its methods OF doing bust
ness as an object lesson for the purpose
OF promoting his. views we protest.
at may be frankly stated at the outset
that the Standard oil company has at
al times, within the limits of fairness
and with due regard for the law, sought
10 secure the most advantageous freight
rates and routes possible. There will be
no denial OF this fact on our part The
question is whether we have at any point
violated the law or the proprieties.
The present inquiry grew out OF a
resolution adopted by congress a year
ago. upon motion OF Mr.. Campbell OF
Kansas. instructing the secretary Of COM
merce and labor to investigate the oil
business as carried on I'm this country.
1--WE welcomed the investigation. When
Commissioners Garfield in the discharge OF
his duty visited our office he and his ex-
perts were given free access 20 our books
and the fullest opportunity 10 ascertain
the manner in which our business was
conducted. Frank disclosures OF all of
our methods were made and every criti-
cism offered by him was met with cam
did, painstaking answer.
BAD FAITH CHARGED.
80 conscious were we OF our rectltude
that we repeatedly importuned Mr. Gar
field to make public the condition exist
ing In Kansas, but he refused We pro-
posed ourselves to answer some OF the
unfair criticisms upon the subject but re-
Trained on Mr.. Garhelds advice and on
his assurance that his report would pre-
sent the case fairly. Ii turns out, so far
as Kansas was concerned that the state
authorities abandoned their attack
one does not care TO handy words with
the president OF the United States. 1t IL
not easy to differentiate between Mr.
Roosevelt the president and Mr. Roose-
welt the individual. He has given us OF
MS advice most generously upon eyery
subject, from the size OF our families to
the mistakes of the Federal Judges and
some error Is inevitable now and then TO
the most conservative man under such
circumstances.
We say fatty that any assertion that
the Standard oil company has been or
is now knowingly engaged in practices
" ms tV,l .F,.f
and unjust
The commissioners report rpon which
rhe presidents message is based opens
with the statement that the manufactlrre
OF refned oil In this country Is about
26.OO0ooo barn els annually.
IL Is unimportant, but IL would never
theiess nave been fair for him to have
STATED that over 100000 barrels of this
annual manufacture is exported. and with
its manufacture or the price the American
public is not interested
IN CENTRES OF DISTRIBUTION
He next calls attention to the fact
that the Standard oil rehneries are 10.
Gated at centres of distribution. while the
independent refneries are usually in the
crude oil fields. This fact II horne
steadily In mind, win answer very many
OF the criticisms which he later indulged
in.
He charges that this location OF re-
hneries and the natural advantages nol-
lowing 1t were obtained by means OF un-
fair competitive methods. but beyonI this
mere assertion does not go into a history
of explanation of these alleged unfair
methods. 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 COM
prehension. AS a matter Of fact the
development OF the pipe line system by
the Standard oil company was In the
face OF violent hostility on tho part OF
the railroads, which naturally were op-
posed TO the Introduction OF such means
OF transportation.
AT enormous cost and In the face Of
steadfast railway opposition at an early
date the Standard oil company adopted
the pipe line method for handling 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 COM
placency
FAVORITISM IN NEW ENGLAND.
Passing from this point, Commissioner
itism. which he alleges has been shown
by various railroad corporations to the
Standard oil company. Tho first specific
case of alleged discrimination to which he
directs attention Is in the New England
territory lt Is charged that we enjoy
monopoly I'm certain parts Of that section
because some OF the railroads there refuse
10 prorate.
The man who could be deceived by
such statement must be pretty dense.
First. II the New England roads ought
TO prorate. but refuse 10 do so. II must
occur TO someone, somewhere, that per-
haps the New England roads and not the
standard oil company are blamable. Sec
ond very casual inquiry would show
that the New England roads are simply
doing what they are forced TO do by nat
ural conditions. and that Mr.. Gar1eld's
attack to be effective, should be directed
81 Long Island sound as means of
freight communication.
obviously. we have an advantage by
the use of our own pipe line from the
western oil fields 10 the coast and the use
OF water transportation thence To- New
England over anyone who uses all-rail
transportation from western points, But
this advantage Is one which II r. not