The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1914-10-23
\ NO ALUM in
\ DR.PRICE;S
\ BAKING POWDER

troleum Company and of the Magnolia
Pipe Line Company was on the stand
On cross examination by Attorney
General West, he stated that the av
erage cost per barrel of producing
oil at Healdton was 6Ac by the Cor
scana Petroleum Co., but that ex
penses did not include lease invest
ments and other expenses. The attor
ney was somewhat tedious in the ex
animation on that point and Judge
Henshaw had the matter passed init.
mating that in the cost of production
many dry holes were to be taken into
consideration.
Would Sell for aoc.
Mr.. Proctor further stated that as
director in the Corsicana Petroleum
| Company he would vote to sell Heald-
ton production at soc a barrel under
existing conditions and at that price a
fair profit could be made in the opera.
tion of the leases He said his operat.
ing company had a profit of $4,000 in
the Healdton field if it could dispose
of it's production and the pipe line
company had profit of about $1,000.
The witness also showed that the Cor.
sicana company had produced 19S,O00
barrels and had sold $4,000.
The witness was asked many ques.
tions concerning the deduction of
three per cent from all producers. If
producer delivers 100 barrels to the
pipe line, he receives credit for 81
barrels. Three per cent is deducted for
dirt, etc. The waste, according to the
refinery test, is about two per cent
e. r. Brown.
T.. r. Brown, vice president and gen.
eral manager of the Magnolia Petro-
leum Company, was the next witness
called. 1t developed in the testimony
that Mr.. Brown began in the yards
with the Standard Oil Company of
New York several years ago. His first
promotion was to be put in as assist
ant superintendent of the refinery and
his next promotion was when he was
sent to Texas to build and operate the
refinery at Corsicana. He is man
who built himself up by close attention |
to business, and he made a free and |
open witness.
t.. Refinery Tests
This witness first brought out the
relative value of the Cushing and
Healdton oils. Here are the refinery
tests:
Healdton crude, gasoline 5957 per
cent, engine naphtha 1884, kerosene,
,1.435, fuel oil 67.1S3, loss 1861. Cush-
ng crude: gasoline 25 per cent, kero-
'ene 35, gas oil 20, fuel oil IS, loss 2.
A barrel of Gushing oil when re-
ined sells for $135 and a barrel of
ltdlulOH Oll Sells IOT 1919.
The freight rate from Cushing to
Beaumont is 46.62c per barrel making
'ushing oil at Beaumont cost $1.O2.
'ipe line transportation from Heald-
on to Beaumont is zoe, making Heald- ,
on oil in Beaumont cost roc Residue :
rom two fields sells at same price, but 8
iealdton residue is better. Freight !
ate from Cushing to Fort Worth is Y
&c, Gushing oil delivered at Fort
Worth costs SSc. The Fort Worth re-
merry will be completed about the 18th
November. The cost of transport
lg oil from Healdton to Ft. Worth is :,
De- (Here the commissioner said the
ost was not more than half that
More can be made out of
urchasng Cushing oil at soc than
ealdton oil at 4Oc.
Selling Contract. {
Witness told of the contract made II
etween his company and the Pierce u
ordyce Company. Contract calls for U
300 barrels day of Healdton OIL "
e Pierce people refine it, agreeing to y"
tain twenty per cent of it and have II
e privilege of returning so per cent.
he Pierce people are retaining on an
erage of 80 per cent. Pipe lines are I
titled to 15c barrel profit Mag. s'
lila Company exclusive of Mexican III
ude handles about three and a.half OIL
m