The disappearance of Miller, the man on whom the firm had depended for superintending building and refining, the withdrawal of Wilson, with whom the enterprise had originated and on which it had staked its hopes of finding a ready market, and the series of suits for infringement of patents, suits which cost Matthews thousands of dollars as well as much embarrassment and delay, were troubles brought on him, so he believed, as the result of a deliberate attempt on the part of the Vacuum Oil Company to make good C. M. Everest's threat to do all in his power to ruin the Buffalo Lubricating Works, and, in the spring of 1883, he brought a civil suit against the Everests for $100,000. While Matthews was working up his case he learned that Miller had returned from California, that he had left the Everests because he claimed they had "not treated him right," and that he was idle in Rochester. Miller seems to have left California chiefly because he had gotten it into his head that the information he had about the measures the Vacuum had taken to prevent the Buffalo Works carrying on their business was valuable. H. B. Everest testified that Miller once said to him after he was settled in California: "Mr. Everest, you have always been kind to me, and I shall do nothing to injure you, but I am going to bust the Standard." I said: "Al, how will you go to work to do that?" "More ways than one," he said; "they can't afford to let me loose," he said. "Sha'n't be bought off, either, unless I get something for it. It will cost them more than twenty-five or fifty thousand dollars before they get through with me." I said: "Al, I think you can make more money raising fruit in California than you can fighting the Standard." This conversation was held immediately after the Vacuum had paid Miller $1,000, in addition to the salary of $1,500 they gave him, and for no apparent purpose except to keep him quiet.

When Matthews learned of Miller's return he asked him to come to Buffalo, and evidently got from him then, for the first time, the story of the pressure the Everests had brought to bear on him to leave the Buffalo Lubricating Works, the "fixing" of the still at their advice so that something would "smash," the transfer of his property, his two years of semi-idleness on $1,500 a year and a bonus of $1,000, paid for a reason which can only be surmised, and his final breaking in California, because, as he claimed, he saw no settled employment in view and no prospect of the Everests doing more for him than they were, and, as they claimed, because he believed he could get a big sum from the Standard to keep silent. To all of this Miller made deposition in July, 1884.

The first civil suit was brought to trial early in March, 1885, and it resulted in the jury giving a verdict of $20,000 to Matthews for damages. The court set the sum aside, claiming that they had proved only $4,000 in damages and that he would not sustain an award of punitive damages. Matthews's counsel now obtained a stay of proceedings and finally a new trial. Now about this time Matthews secured evidence which emboldened him to give his suit a much wider range than he had at first intended. This was the testimony of the lawyer Truesdale, quoted above, that in his office Everest had suggested that Miller "arrange the machinery so that it would bust up or smash up." The explosion of June 15 was immediately construed as the result of this counsel. On the strength of this evidence Matthews instituted a second civil suit for damages of $250,000 caused by conspiracy to blow up the works of the Buffalo company, to entice away its employees, to bring unfounded suits against it, and to slander the company's product, and he added to the original defendants the three other directors of the Vacuum Works — H. H. Rogers, J. D. Archbold and Ambrose McGregor — and the Standard Oil Company of New York, the Acme Oil Company of New York and the Vacuum Oil Company. Matthews seems to have argued that, as Rogers, Archbold and McGregor were directors with the Everests in the Vacuum Oil Company, they had probably been consulted by the Everests concerning Miller, and could be included in the conspiracy, and, as the Vacuum, Standard Oil Company and Acme Oil Company were all concerns in the Standard Oil Trust, they, too, could be included. He also went before the Grand Jury of Erie County in opposition to the advice of his counsel and secured there an indictment of H. H. Rogers, J. D. Archbold, Ambrose McGregor and the two Everests for criminal conspiracy. The defendants succeeded in getting the indictment set aside the first time, but Matthews re-presented the case, and a second indictment was found of the same persons. It should be noted that Mr. McGregor was indicted only because he was a director of the Vacuum Works, his name not being mentioned in the evidence presented to the Grand Jury.

An indictment for conspiracy of three men of such prominence as Mr. Rogers, Mr. Archbold and Mr. McGregor riveted the attention of the whole country on the coming trial. It was apparent from the first that the Standard meant to put up a big fight to have the indictment quashed. They had, indeed, set a strong machinery at work immediately to get evidence on which to bring a counter charge of conspiracy; that is, that Matthews's intention in starting the Buffalo Lubricating Works was never to do business, but to force the Standard to buy him out at a big price. They at once set a detective to work on the case, one item of his instructions reading: "We have reason to believe that the suit is brought for the purpose of forcing the Standard to purchase the works of the Buffalo Lubricating Company, and Matthews has made certain statements to that effect; would like reports of any statements or admissions by him in relation to his objects in these suits." Under the direction of this detective, a man employed in Matthews's works for some months made daily reports of what he saw and heard there, copies of which were forwarded to the Standard office in New York. A detective was also put on Miller's track. Miller was now employed in a refinery in Corry, Pennsylvania, and here he was for a long time under espionage. The chief expression obtained from him was by luring him into a saloon one Sunday afternoon and getting him half drunk. While in this condition, the saloon-keeper testified, he said the Buffalo suit was a —— humbug, but there was money in it and that they (he and the persons who were drinking with him) might as well make it as anybody.

It was on May 2, 1886, that the trial began. The array of wealth and legal learning in the Buffalo court-room during the fourteen days' case set not only the town, but the country agape. There were not only the Standard men indicted for conspiracy — H. H. Rogers, J. D. Archbold, Ambrose McGregor — but Mr. Rockefeller himself was there, quiet, steady, watchful. The hostile said the accused and their counsel were disdainful of the proceedings — nobody charged Mr. Rockefeller with disdain. With him were other strong men of the concern, William Rockefeller, Daniel O'Day, J. P. Dudley. There was a great array of legal learning five eminent lawyers — Wilson S. Bissell, a former law partner of ex-President Cleveland; W. F. Cogswell, of Rochester, counted then one of the ablest lawyers of the state; Theodore Bacon and F. G. Outerbridge, both of Rochester; Daniel Lockwood, famous in politics as well as law; and, of course, S. C. T. Dodd. This for the accused. For the people was the district-attorney of Erie County, George T. Quinby, with one assistant. For fourteen days witnesses were examined, and the above story was dragged from them by dint of questioning and cross-questioning. On May 10 the testimony for the prosecution ended, and the "people rested." The Standard lawyers immediately applied for the acquittal of Mr. Rogers, Mr. Archbold and Mr. McGregor, on the ground that no fact or circumstance had been proved that connected them in the slightest degree with the charge of conspiracy to lure Miller away or to destroy the Buffalo Works. The district-attorney combated the proposition vigorously. These gentlemen, he contended, owned three-fourths of the Vacuum Works; they were always present at directors' meetings; it was a fair presumption that they knew what was done to persuade Miller to leave the Buffalo Works; they must have known the moneys paid him while he was doing little work. Mr. Rogers had certainly threatened Matthews that he would carry up the patent suits until the Buffalo Works got enough of it. Judge Haight, however, advised the jury to acquit Mr. Rogers, Mr. Archbold and Mr. McGregor. "The indictment charges a conspiracy," the judge said. "It also charges certain overt acts. One of the acts charged in the indictment is the enticing away from the Buffalo company of a servant. Another of the acts alleged is an attempt to blow up or destroy the Buffalo Works, and another act that of bringing false suits against the corporation. So far as the agreement or combination to entice away a servant from the Buffalo company is concerned, I have not been able to recall any evidence which shows that either of these three defendants ever knew of it, ever heard of it, or ever took any part in it at all. So far as the charge of an attempt to blow up the Buffalo Works is concerned, I have been unable to recall any evidence that has been given in which either of these three defendants ever knew of it, ever heard of it, ever advised it, or ever took any part in it whatever. The only thing about which I have had any doubt was in reference to the maintaining of actions which have been brought upon patent rights which were formerly owned by the Everests, and by the Everests transferred to the Vacuum Oil Company, and it appears that two suits were brought upon patents, and that there was another suit, a third one, in reference to a trade-mark. It appears from the evidence that upon one occasion Mr. Matthews went to New York and had a talk with Mr. Rogers, and that his conversation has already been discussed and related in your hearing. The query in my mind was as to whether or not the inference could not be drawn, from this conversation, that Rogers did know of the bringing of these actions, acquiesced in their being brought, and in that way became a party to them; but, even conceding that the actions were brought with his knowledge and consent, I am inclined still to think that the evidence is hardly sufficient to warrant his conviction, for the reason that it does not appear that the actions were brought without probable cause; in other words, the bringing of an action and being defeated in the action is not of itself sufficient to authorise a jury to say that it was a false action. That standing alone is not sufficient to authorise a jury to say that it is a false action, but there must be shown in addition to that that there was a want of probable cause; in other words, that the party bringing the action knew and understood beforehand that he had no good cause of action. . . . I am inclined to the opinion that the evidence would not warrant his conviction upon that ground."

The acquittal of the three Standard gentlemen was followed by an application for the acquittal of the Everests, but the case with them was different. It had been proved conclusively that they threatened at the start to ruin the new concern, and that they had counselled Miller "to arrange the machinery so it would bust up or smash up"; there was a strong presumption that Miller, acting on this advice, had arranged for the explosion of June 15, though, as he claimed, he meant only to "give them a scare." The judge denied the application in their case, therefore, and the trial went on. The whole force of the defence was now thrown to proving that Matthews had gone into the Buffalo Lubricating Company merely to sell out. His offer to Mr. Brewster in 1882, his talk of making the Standard settle, were rehearsed. Two witnesses were produced also who told of seeking Matthews in 1885, after the criminal suit was brought, and of offering, on the ground that they knew the Standard defendants, to attempt to settle the affair. Matthews had told these men that if the Standard would give him $250,000 for his refinery, he would withdraw the civil suit, but that he could not touch the criminal suit, as it was in the hands of the district-attorney. The jury was not greatly influenced by the evidence produced to show that Matthews was a blackmailer. Evidently they concluded that, granting that the Everests had cause of complaint against the men for using their processes — they certainly had no just cause in the fact of the three men setting up in business for themselves — granting that the enterprise was started for blackmailing purposes — and there was no proof offered that it was — the Everests should have taken their case into the courts — not plotted the destruction of the refinery by any such underhand methods as they employed. Whatever the jury's process of reasoning, however, it is certain that on May 16 they brought in a verdict of "guilty as charged by the indictment."

Table of Contents