New-York tribune., 1906-11-16
ISUES STANDARD OIL.
Continued from first page.

Oil Company of New Jersey and seventy other
! corporations and limited partnerships and the
seven Individual defendants before named, In the
eighth judicial circuit at st. Louis. Mo-. to have
the said combination adjudged and decreed to
be unlawful and that the holding and control by
the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey of
the stocks of the seventy corporations be de-
prohibited from declaring or paying any divi-
dends the Standard Oil Company of New
Jersey, and be enJolned from entering INTO or
performing any contract or combination TO re-
strain trade and commerce or to monopolize
trade in the future
The question whether any action of a different
nature should be taken is reserved for future
consideration. The controversy Is now pending
in the courts, and any further comment by this
department by any connected with 1T
would obviously be improper and unfair
SYNOPSIS OF THE PETITION.
The petition gives a complete history Of the
Standard Oil Company from the origin TO the
present time This history the petition divides
into three periods which it summarizes as fol-
| lows
During the first one of these periods. to wit.
from 1870 to 1882 the combination assumed the
form of simple conspiracy-that is TO say,
| the defendants. with the Standard Oil Company
of Ohio which they organized, purchased and
| obtained interests in by stock ownership and
otherwise, and entered into agreements with
various persons, firms corporations and limited
partnerships engaged in the same business,
whereby they acted together to suppress COM
| petition and control the oil business.
During the second period, to wit. from 1882 TO
1879, the combination and conspiracy assumed
the form of trust agreement whereby about
forty separate corporations and limited partner
ships, engaged In the same business, turned
over the management of their said business to
nine trustees, OF which these individual defend
ants We're the majority so that these defend
ants controlled all of these corpora tions and
limited partnerships and thereby eliminated the
competition between the same. Such trust agree
ment having been declared illegal by the Su-
preme Court of Ohio in 1892 the trustees passed
a resolution dssOlvinG the trust, but. neverthe-
poratfons and limited partnerships in the same
manner until 1899. at which time, being
PEELED to abandon the trust agreement, they
placed all of the stocks of these corporations
and limited partnerships, which had been pre-
viously controlled by the trustees. into the
Standard Oil Company Of New Jersey hold
ing corporation.
And since 1899 the Standard Oil Company of
New Jersey has controlled all the various cor
poratons, purchased the stocks of other cor
poratons. and organized new corporations until
1t now has in said combination about seventy
corporations
The bill instances various contracts with COM
peting concerns by which competition has been
elimtnate ted, among others contract between the
Standard Oil Company and the Tidewater Pipe
Company and the Tidewater Oil Company.
whereby the Tidewater companies are limited to
| Ih per cent of certain business In Pennsyl-
vania and New York and the Standard OIL Com
pany to receive S81a per cent of the business the
| Standard OIL Company guaranteeing the Tide
| water company 100000 per annum profits,
| thereby eliminating all competition between
| them. This last contract was made in 1888
| The bill alleges contract made with the
Pennsylvania Railroad Company in 1884 which
was in existence until 1906, in which It was
| agreed that the rates for the transportation Of
| oil should be fixed by the railroad company with
| tho advice and concurrence Of the National
| Transit Company Zone of the Standard OIL COM
panies), thereby comforting upon the transit
! company the power to maintain high railroad
! rates so as to prevent competitors from ship
ping crude oil in competition with the Standard
| Oils pipe lines.
1t is alleged that the Standard OIL Company
| and the Standard Oil Trust have had control of
and monopolized the carrying business by pipe
| lines in and from all the oil producing regions OF
| the United states except Texas, Louisiana and
| California.
! SYSTEM OF PREFERENTIAL RATES.
1t is alleged that one of the principal instru-
| mentalities through which the defendants have
| been enabled to monopoze the commerce IN
! petroleum and its products throughout tho
| United States has been a system of preferential
rates, and rates discriminatory against the COM
pettors of the Standard Oil Company, both in
! open and published tariffs and by and through
secret and unpublished rates. both interstate and
intrastate. and by rebates, concessions and pref
| erences granted to the Standard Oil Company
! and its subsidiary corporations.
1t is alleged in the bill that the railroads of
| the United States have uniformly established a
| by which the rates from the several shipping
| points of the Standard OIL Company have been
| relatively lower under similar circumstances
! and conditions, than the rates from competitive
! points. and that such system of discrimination
| has been obtained through the ownership and
| influence OF the individual defendants and 9TH
ers acting in their interest. in the various rail-
roads of the United States and by reason Of
the fact that they were enabled to give such
railroads large traffic to take such traffic away
| from them in the event the rates were not sat
| isfaCtOry.
oil
| other individuals associated with them and in
tereSted with them in the Standard Oil trust and
! the Standard Oil Company and it's subsidiary
| corporations have purchased and acquired large
interests in the stocks of the principal railroads
| Of the United States, and have caused them
selves 10 be elected or have caused other per-
| sons acting in their interest to be elected, as
members of the boards of directors of ouch rail-
| roads, and that by reason of such ownership
| and representation the boards of directors of
| such railroads the individual defendants have
| Influenced said railroads to establish and main
| tain said discriminatory rates.
CONTROL OF RAILROADS ALLEGED.
The petition then names the following rail-
roads il which the defendants are interested and
| upon the boards of directors of which they have
| representation:
| William RockefelIer-C'entraI New England
Railway Company; Chicago, Milwaukee & St
! Paul Railway Company; Delaware, LaCka-
wanna & Western Railroad Company; Lake
! Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company
| Michigan Central Railroad Company. New York
! Central & Hudson River Railroad Company
New York. Chicago q ST Louis Railroad Com
pany; New York, New Haven & Hartford Rail
| road Company; New York, ontario & Western
| way Company, Pittsburg & Lake Erie Railroad
| Company, Rutland Railroad Company. .
Henry H Rogers-Atchison. Topeka & Santa
| Fe Railway Company; Chicago, Milwaukee &
| St Paul Railway Company: Union Pacific Rail-
road Company.
| Charles NJ Pratt-Boston & Maine Railroad
! Company. Evansville & Terre Haute Railroad
! Company. Long Island Railroad Company