The Richmond palladium. (Richmond, Ind.) 1906-1907, 1906-10-17
CASE At F|NDLAY
NEARING AN END
Arguments Made to Jury Sit
ting in Prosecution OF
Standard Oil Co.
EACH SIDE RESTS CASE.
STATE INSPECTOR FINLEY AND
A DEPUTY ARE CALLED TO
THE WITNESS STAND-FIvE
MINUTE SPEECHES.

FIndIay, o., Oct. lev. L. .-.ee,,
state inspector Of oil, was the first wit
ness In the trial of the Standard Oil
company of Ohio, for alleged conspira-
cy against trade. Attorney General
Ellis of Ohio was again present at the
trial.
Mr.. Finley was questioned by Mr..
Harrison Of the attorney generals
pface. Mr.. Finley described the loca-
ton and number Of his deputies and
method OF inspection. The fees for
inspection at Cleveland. he said. were
paid by the Standard Oil company OF
Ohio. At Lima, the Solar Refining
company has a refinery. Ninety-nine
per cent of the fees for inspection at
Lima are also paid by the Standard
Oil company. the Solar paying very
small. or / per cent OF the fees at
Lima. Mr. Finley said one-half the
oil refined in Ohio was refined at
Lima, that this oil is shipped in the
cars Of the Union Tank Line company.
These questions and answers were
all put in over the protests OF the de-
tense.
The Standard of Ohio, Mr.. Finley
said, had from $50 to 200 tank stations
for the distribution and sale of refined
oil. while the Solar had no such sta
lions. Mr.. Finley was not cross-ex-
amined.
MT Shafter. deputy local oil inspec-
tor at F1ndlay. who testified last week,
was recalled. He said the Standard
county and no other company sold Oil
here except the National Refining
company.
With this evidence the state rested
its case.
Mr.. Kline, for the defense, then put
in the first evidence for the defense.
He first filed as evidence a certified
copy of the journal entry, the judg-
ment of the court in the case of the
state of Ohio against the Standard Oil
company, known as the contempt pro-
ceedings.
Attorney General Ellis made objec-
ton to this evidence. saying the state
in this case had put In the responses
Of Mr.. Rockefeller to the interroga-
tories in that case which represented
the Standards case. The state had
also filed the issues and REPLIES. Mr..
Kline held that to make that record
complete it was necessary to put in
the conclusion of the court, which he
said dismissed the case at the expense
Of the state Il think" said Mr.. Kline,
ut comes with mighty poor grace for
an officer of this state to object to the
of the journal entry of
the supreme court Of the state
Mr.. Ellis replied by saying that this
entry had nothing to do with this case.
The court admitted the evidence.
Mr.. Kline read this record, and then
Defendant rests"
In 5-minute recess 1t was arrang-
ed that five speeches would be made
to the jury, three by the states at
torneys and two by the defense. Pros.
ecutor David opened for the State and
arguments were made by the attorney
general and Mr.. Phelps for the prose
cution. Messrs. Kline and Troup pre-
scented the defense to the jury.
In his argument Mr.. David said it
" % AoL diSputCu Dy any oAC thdI tlO
Standard Oil trust actually existed in
1882. The state now contends that
this same trust, only under another
name. still exists. He mentioned the
various local companies now doing
business in the state, saying they were
members Of the original trust.
THE people in this case" said Mr..
David, claim that the Standard Oil
company of New Jersey now owns the
stock OF these subsidiary companies.
each one dependent upon the other
and right now doing business among
US. We have shown that these same
gentlemen, John D. Rockefeller. Will
liam Rockefeller. Flagler, Archbold.
Rogers, are today the heads of these
These men were OF the
nine original trustees in the trust"