The Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1???-1928, 1907-12-30

CONVICTION OF TRUST
AT Chicago For Violation Of Elkins
" Anti-Rebate Law and Subsequent
Fine Brings Forth
Issue.


Washington, Dec. 29-At request q
the Secretary OF Commerce and Labol
1.-THE Commissioners OF Corporations has
made an answer to the allegations o
1.-THE Standard Oil Company concerning
Its conviction at Chicago on thc
Icharge of violating the Elklns anti
rebate law The statement in full il
herewith presented:
| On August 8, 1907, at Chicago, the
Standard Oil Company of Indiana was
fined $29,24O,o00 for the violation o.
the Elkins antirebate law. This was
the so-called Alton case" Various
statments have since apepared, one
| in particular signed by tho president
Of that company, James A. Moffett
others in the public press, and also
series of confidential circular trade
letters" all endavoring to throw doubt
on the legality and equity of that con
viction.
| The report of the Commissioner OF
Corporations on the transportation 0i
petroleum., published in May, 1906, on
which this and all other pending re-
bate indictments of the Standard Tex.
cept one) were based, set forth IN
detail the deliberate, long-continued
duct on the part Of the tSandard In
violating the anti-rebate laws. But
| these recent statements have made II
necessary to show onece moro that
| the transactions which form the basis
OF this conviction at Chicago were
such as struck at the very life and
spirit of the Elkins anti-rebate law and
of the policy of congress in forbidding
Iunfairness as between shippers
The question iii this case was one
of published is cent rate to East st
Louis, as against a secret 6 cent rate.
The oil shipments involved In this
so-called Alton conviction started
from Whiting, Ind, the great refinery
of the Standard near Chicago, and
were delivered at st. Louis, Mo-, or at
East st. Louis. H., just across the
| river from st. Louis, by tho Chicago
and Alton Railroad. They covered a
period from September /, 1903, to
March 1, 1905.
The law requires that all interstate
railway rates be filed with the Inter.
state Commerce Commission. During
this entire time there was on file with
tho Interstate Commerce Commission
Ia joint tariff or rate sheet to which
the Alton road was party, showing
that the rate on fifth class freight
from Whiting and Chicago to East st.
Louis was Is cents per hundred
pounds. Fifth class freight includes
petroleum oil. This joint tariff was
q large printed document distributed
to many shippers of all sorts of
freight.
During the time SO stated, 1,462 cars
OF oil were carried from Whiting, Ind,
to East ST. Louis over the Alton road
for the Standard Oil Company at the
rate of cents per hundred pounds,
Just onethird of the said published
rate. This same secret 6-cent rate had
been used by the Standard Oil Com
pany, and by no one else, for many
years prior to this period. II was not
filed with the Interstate Commerce
Commission, and was absolutely sec
ret and unknown to independent oil
reflners, or to shippers generally.
The said statement of James A.
Moffett uses the following remarkable
language:
1t must be borne in mind that
there is no question of rebate or dis.
elimination In this case.
Whether 1t was rebate" of not is
a mere question of words. Apparently
the position of Mr. Moffett is that IL
he had actually paid the Alton rail
road rs cents per hundred pounds. and
received back ~ cents. SO as to make
a net rate. of cents. this would have
been rebate" But. that. because
the lawful rate was rs cents and his
'Sihf"hf oHif pau ~ 1ttt i1t UdfdHtt
tl2 cents never physically passed
back and forth between his company
and the Alton railroad, although the
result was exactly the same. II was
not rebate" This statement is
simply an evasion.
The other proposition Of Mr.. Mof
tett is that there was mo discrimin
alton IN this case" Apparently his
position is that. because no one else
is known to have paid the published
is cent rate from Whiting to East st
Louis while his company was paying
6 cents. therefore there was no dis.
elimination On the contrary. this
very situation proves that not onI,
was there discrimination, but that this
discrimination had worked out its
legal result so that no one else could
ship at IS cents In competition with
Tho CfanIarI-e 4 <n.+