Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1915-11-28

Ihat the sixth paragraph of said con-
tract as amended, provides that the
property shall ho paid for at the rate
OF so cents barrel on the net amount
Of merchantablc oil agreed upon by
the gaugers. That the terms "B. s.,
water and sediment and merchantable
oil are technical terms of general
use in the oil industry in the Cushing
field, and that many million barrels
of oil have been sold i'm id field. and
that it is the universal custom to pro-
vide in said sales that the oil Shall
be free of "B. s., water and scdi-
ment, and shall be mcrchantable OIL
That there are numerous gaugers op-
Grating in said field thoroughly fa-
miliar with said terms and thorough
ly qualified to ascertain by inspection
and measurement of a tank the quail
ity Of merchantable oil contained
therein, and to deduct out of said
tanks the "B. s., water and sediment.
That the terms "B s., water and
sediment indicate the refuse matter
which settles i'm a tank when fresh
petroleum is stored therein, and that
the same is worthless and has no
value of any kind. That shortly after
the gdugerS selected by the plaintiff
and the defendant commenced work,
the gauger representing the defend
ant made the unusual and thereto
fore unhcard of claim that that the
"B. 5" contained a small percentage
Of merchantable oil, and the plaintiff
is informed and believes, and upon
such information states. the fact to be
that such claim was made by the de-
fendants gauger upon the defendant S
request, and with the intention and
for the nf h4yriprr t.z
for the breach Of contract, notwith-
standing the fact that both the said
defendant and its gaugcrs well knew
that it was the universal custom in
the trade to reject the B. s" entirely
as not merchantable oil, and when the
plaintiffs gauger refused to COncedc
that the "B. S" was merchantable as
claimed by the defendants gauger,
the said defendant refused to continue
the gauging Of said OIL and after
some negotiations with the plaintiff
on November /. 1915, served on the
plaintiff a formal notice Of cancelIa-
tion and denial Of all liability under
said contract.
Simple Operation.
That the matter of gauging said oil
and aScertaining the amount of "R.
s., water and sediment therein is not
q dlttcult or intricate subject, but
can be done by numerous persons IA
miliar with such oil and gaugiDg the
same in said field, and that there is a
well-known, definite and established
method of so doing
That after receiving such notice this
complainant still insisted upon the
performance Of said contract and on
the same day submitted to the defend
ant communication in writing, a
copy Of which is hereto attached ana
referred TO as a part of this bin OF
complaint, in which 1t called the at
tentiOn Of the defendant to the fact
that the oil covered by the contract
was already the property of the COM
plainant anG urged upon the defend
ant the propriety OF carrying out the
terms and provisions OF said contract.
but under date of November 3, 1915,
the said defendant delivered a letter
to the complainant in which il again
repudiated its liability under the
terms Of said contract, and refused
explicitly to perform any of its terms
and conditions. Thereupon on No
vember 4. 1915. this complainant