Albuquerque citizen., 1907-09-12


tors of the Standard Oil company
have issued a statement concerning
the company's part in the big fine
case recently concluded by Judge
Lands at Chicago, which is as fol-
lows:
a Word i'm Advance.
1.-The directors of the Standard Oil
company desire to emphasize for the
half million of people directly inter
ested in its welfare the assurance Of
the company's absolute innocence of
wrongdoing in any of the prosecu-
tons lately instituted against ii in
the federal courts. Particularly Is
this 50 in the recent Chicago & AL
ton railroad case, made notorious by
the sensational fine of $29,24O,0 900
imposed on the standard Oil COM
| pany of Indiana.
1T should be known as widely as
possible that this is no case of rebate
or discrimination, but simply of the
legality of a freight rate. 1t should
| tanned by the government upon the
most hair-splitting technicality, aid
ed by the rigorous exclusion of evil
| dence that would have removed all
presumption of guilt
so Times OILS Value.
"If. the judgment in question be
allowed to stand the company Will
be forced to pay $4,000 dhat is,
| fifty times the value of the OLD for
every carload carried over the Alton
road during two years at an open D
| cent rate-a rate used over three
competing railroads for from ten to
! fourteen years! The trial judge re-
fused to allow proof that the 6 cent
rate had been filed by the Chicago
& Eastern Illinois, and was, there
| fore, a legal rate He refused to
allow proof that linseed oil, for in
| stance, was carried at cents, and
other bulk commodities as low as 5
cents. He insisted that Is cents was
the only legal rate for oil when no
one had ever paid it, and when it
was authoritatively sworn that ii did
not apply to oil
''The case has been taken on ap-
peal to the higher courts TO which
we must look for that calm judg-
ment which will rescue the rights of
the citizen from the field of public
! clamor and from the domain of vim
dictlve politics.
| War Against Company.
$50 persistent and adroit has been
the warfare waged with all the over
powering authority of the federal ad-
ministration against the Standard Oil
| company, that it has been manif- silly
| difficult to get a fair hearing before
the public or in a large portion of
the press, the latter, to its great
harm, swayed alike by socialistic out
| cry from below and political pres
| "As proof of the latter it may be
Inoted that in the presidents mes
| sage of May 4, 1906, attack was made
| on the Standard Oil company for the
purpose of forcing the passage of the
| bill remitting the duty on denatured
| alcohol measure in which the
company was not interested. On
May II, 1905, the issue of Commis-
| sioner Garfield's report on petroleum
! transportation, a tissue of old mis-
representations, was timed to influ-
ence the Hepburn rate bill then be-
while Judge lands had still under
consideration the judgment in the
| Chicago a. Alton case Commissioner
Smiths illogical and partisan report
on pipe lines was made public. The
| commissioners second report on pc
troleum prices and proflts--a wholly
false deduction from incomplete
facts-was sent in advance to the
press for publication on August 5 in
the knowledge that Judge lands
would pronounce judgment on Aug
ust 3. Here surely is evidence of a
combination influencing all sources
of public opinion, disturbing the or
derry dispensation of justice, sane
toning in advance and supporting
when made, the most sensational
opinions and judgments hostile to the
company.
The Motive.
What motive underlies ihe cam
paign Of defamation need not here
be discussed, but for all, friends and
foes, il is reiterated that the stand
ard Oil company Is carrying on a
widespread business of great moment
to the prosperity of the American
people in absolute obedience to the
soundest principles of business and
to the spirit and letter of the law,
Attacks upon it of the kind described ID
are aimed at the nations industrial
and mercantile life"
Monetts Statement.
James A. Moffett, president of the
Standard Oil company, of Indiana
made the following statement IN
connection with that of the direc'
tors;
The court having pronounced ia
) judgment I'm the case Of the United
States VS.. Standard oil company, OF
Indiana, there can now be no i'm
propriety In stating our position tc
the American people.
THE facts in this case are simple
and easily understood. The STANDARD
J OF company Of Indiana, was con
victed of receiving what the govern
ment claimed was concession from
--~-~-~------->~--------
| lConfinuad an I0aOa Eoup