The Garland globe. [volume] (Garland, Utah) 1906-191?, 1908-02-01
Commissioner Smith VS.. The Standard Oil Co.
From the Railsuay Wo,l4, January 3, 1905.

Mr.. Herbert Knox Smith, whose zeal In the
cause of economic reform has been In no wise
abated by the panic which he and his kind did
so much to bring on, is out with an answer to
President Moffett, of the Standard Oil Com
pany of Indiana. The publication of this an
swer, 1t is officially given out was delayed sew
eral weeks, "for business reasons" because 1t
was not deemed advisable to further excite
the public mind, which was profoundly dis
turbed by the crisis. Now that the storm
clouds have rolled by, however, tho Commits
sioner rushes again into the fray.
Our readers remember that the chief points
in the defence of the Standard Oil Company. as
presented by President Moffett, were ~ that
the date of six cents on oil from Whiting to
East st. Louis has been issued to the Standard
OIL Company as the lawful rate by employees
of the Alton, (2) that the 1S-cent rate on file
with the Interstate Commerce Commission was
a class and not a commodity rate, never being
intended to apply to oil, 90 that oil was
shipped in large quantities between Whiting
and East st. Louis over the Chicago & East
ern Illinois at 6A cents per hundred pounds,
which has been filed with the Interstate Com
MERGE Commission as the lawful rate, and "a
that the 1S-cent rate on oil was entirely out Of
proportion to lawful rates on other commodi-
ties between these points Of similar char
acter and of greater value, such, for example,
as linseed oil. the lawful rate on which was
eight cents. President Moffett also stated that
thousands of tons of freight had been sent by
other shippers between these points under
substantially the same conditions as governed
the shipments of the Standard Oil Company.
This defence of the Standard Oil Company
was widely quoted and has undoubtedly exert
ed powerful influence upon the public mind.
Naturally the Administration, which has
staked the success of its campaign against
the trusts" upon the result Of its attack upon
this company, endeavors to Offset this inhu-
ence, and hence the new deliverance of Com
missioner Smith.
We need hardly to point out that his rebut.
tai argument is extremely weak although as
strong, no doubt, as the circumstances would
warrant. He answers the points made by Presi-
dent Moffett substantially as follows: "a The
Standard OIL Company had traffic department
and should have known that the six-cent rate
had not been filed. (2) no answer, (3) the Chi
cage & Eastern Illinois rate was a secret rate
because 1t read, not from Whiting, but from
BOLTON, which is described as "a village OF
about /, 500 population just outside of Chicago
Its only claim to note is that 1t has been for
many years the point of origin for this and
similar secret rates" The Commissioner ad
mts in describing this rate that there was a
note attached stating that the rate could also
be used from Whiting
The press has quite generally hailed this
statement OF the Commissioner of Corpora
tons as a conclusive REPUTATION Of what is evi
IDENTIFY recognized as the strongest rebuttal
argument advanced by the Standard.
In fact. 1t is as weak and inconclusve as the
remainder of his argument. The lines of the
Chicago & Eastern Illinois do not run into