The committee had a vague idea that refineries outside of the Standard Combination had had a hard time to live, and asked if the trust had sought in any way to make the operations of outsiders so unprofitable that they would either have to come in or go out of the business.

"They have not; no, sir, they have not," replied Mr. Rockefeller.

"And they have lived on good terms with their competitors?"

"They have, and have to-day very pleasant relations with those gentlemen."

It would have been interesting to have heard the comments of a number of gentlemen trying to carry on an independent business in 1888 on that answer: of the refiners in Oil City and Titusville, at that time preparing to carry their troubles to the Interstate Commerce Commission; of George Rice and others at Marietta, Ohio; of H. H. Campbell, of the Bear Creek Refining Company at Pittsburg; of Scofield, Shurmer and Teagle at Cleveland.

If all of Mr. Rockefeller's testimony had been of the nature of the above, the investigation would have been worth little to the people who demanded it. But when it came to the questions which, after all, it was most essential to have answered at that moment, Mr. Rockefeller, after some skirmishing, gave the committee as frank testimony as is on record from him. The information wanted was in regard to the organisation of the Standard Oil Trust. As pointed out in a previous chapter, there had been some kind of an agreement adopted in 1882, binding together the varied interests which controlled the oil business. But what it was, where it was kept, by what authority it lived, nobody knew. For six years it had succeeded in hiding itself. What was the understanding which had made a trust of a company? The committee asked to know. Mr. Rockefeller and his counsel were the soul of amiability under the demand. They had only one request, and Mr. Choate made it persuasively:

"If the committee please," he said, "I do not arise to make an objection to a request of the committee; we think that it is very proper that the committee should be made acquainted with this document and everything pertaining to it in order to advise them as to the nature and operation of this trust; at the same time, there are private interests and controversies involved which might be seriously prejudiced by a public exposition of its details, and therefore, in producing it, we, without asking the committee to make any promise or to commit themselves at all, request that while they make whatever use of it they please, it shall not be in all its details made a matter of public record or exhibition unless in their final judgment, after consideration of the matter, they shall consider it necessary. There are very important private interests involved that ought not, under the guise of a public investigation, to be interfered with."

The committee examined the document and concluded to include it in its report. [125] Like all great things, it was simplicity itself an agreement which anybody could understand, by which some fifty persons holding controlling interests in corporations, joint stock associations, and partnerships of different states, placed all their stock in the hands of nine trustees, receiving in return trust certificates. These nine trustees themselves owned a majority of the stock and had complete control of all the property. Mr. Rockefeller, when questioned, stated that one of the trustees was a responsible officer in almost every refinery or organisation in the trust; that the trustees, as a body, knew by reports and correspondence, and by frequent consultation in New York with active promoters of each concern, just how the business was going on. "We all know how the business goes," said Mr. Rockefeller; "we get reports once in thirty days showing what it has cost for everything."

The trustees evidently ran the entire great combination under the agreement. But consider the anomaly of the situation. Thirty-nine corporations, each of them having a legal existence, obliged by the laws of the state creating it to limit its operations to certain lines and to make certain reports, had turned over their affairs to an organisation having no legal existence, independent of all authority, able to do anything it wanted anywhere; and to this point working in absolute darkness. Under their agreement, which was unrecognised by the state, a few men had united to do things which no incorporated company could do. It was a situation as puzzling as it was new. The committee in reporting on what it discovered did nothing to solve the puzzle. It simply sounded a warning:

"The actual value of property in the trust control at the present time is not less than one hundred and forty-eight millions of dollars, according to the testimony of the trust's president before your committee. This sum in the hands of nine men, energetic, intelligent, and aggressive — and the trustees themselves, as has been said, own a majority of the stock of the trust which absolutely controls the one hundred and forty-eight millions of dollars — is one of the most active and possibly the most formidable moneyed power on this continent. Its influence reaches into every state and is felt in remote villages, and the products of its refineries seek a market in almost every seaport on the globe. When it is remembered that all this vast wealth is the growth of about twenty years, that this property has more than doubled in value in six years, and that with this increase the trust has made aggregate dividends during that period of over fifty millions of dollars, the people may well look with apprehension at such rapid development and centralisation of wealth wholly independent of legal control, and anxiously seek out means to modify, if not to prevent, the natural consequence of the device producing it, a device of late invention, namely, the aggregation of great corporations into partnerships with unbounded resources and a field of operations quite as extended as its resources. So much for the nature of the Standard Oil Trust. The committee regret that they are not able to make a more complete and satisfactory report as to the method of its operations and its effect upon public interests.

"The brevity of the time within which the investigation was required to be made rendered it impossible for your committee to do more than examine the persons most prominent in the management of its affairs. Its cause was thus presented to the most favourable light possible, and it is only fair to conclude that nothing was left unsaid by them that could be said in its favour. No witness came forward to accuse it of the great offences commonly laid to its charge. No proofs were made of its rapacity or of the greed with which it lays hold of every competitive industry, except such as might be drawn from the fact that it is the almost sole occupant of the field of oil operations, from which it has driven nearly every competitor. No witness appeared to prove its power over railroad and transportation companies and to wring from already impoverished lines better terms than other shippers, except such as might be drawn from the admission of its officers, made with hesitation, that this wealth and the amount of its business enabled it to obtain better terms than its poorer competitors." [126]

The New York Senate made its investigation of trusts in February, 1888. In March the Committee on Manufactures of the House of Representatives began a similar inquiry. This committee, like the earlier one, made the Standard its principal subject. Fully 1,000 pages of a report of 1,500 pages are devoted to Mr. Rockefeller's creation — five times the space given to the Sugar Trust, ten times that given to the Whiskey Trust. The testimony was wide in range. Indeed, from the volume alone, a pretty complete history of the Standard Oil Company up to 1888 could be written. Here are found the South Improvement Company charter and contracts in full. Here is Mr. Cassatt's testimony, taken in the case of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. the Pennsylvania Railroad, showing the character of the rebates the Standard Combination was able to secure from the railroads at that time. Here is a partial history of the growth of the Standard pipe-lines. Many personal histories of refiners driven out of business by the conditions brought about by railroad discriminations; full accounts of the war of the producing element on the Standard; all of the testimony in the Buffalo case, where two refiners were found guilty of conspiring to ruin an independent refining concern; the reports of the Interstate Commerce Commission in the cases of George Rice; and much interesting explanation of various matters by leading Standard Oil officials appear in the report.

Mr. Rockefeller was on the stand, and one item of his testimony affords a curious comparison. On the 28th of February, when before the New York Senate committee, Mr. Rockefeller was asked if he was not a member of the South Improvement Company.

"I was not," he replied.

On the 30th of the April following, when before the House Committee, the following colloquy took place:

Q. I want the names particularly of gentlemen who either now or in the past have been interested with you gentlemen who were in the South Improvement Company?

A. I think they were O. T. Waring, W. P. Logan, John Logan, W. G. Warden, O. H. Payne, H. M. Flagler, William Rockefeller, J A. Bostwick, and — myself.

It was in this investigation that Henry M. Flagler gave explanations of various operations of the Standard, which have been quoted in the course of this narrative, notably explanations of the South Improvement Company, of the ten-cent rebate secured from all the railroads in 1875, of the purchase of the Empire Transportation Company, of the rebate on other people's shipments enjoyed in 1878 by the American Transfer Company. Some of Mr. Flagler's testimony in this investigation compares as curiously with affidavits of his made in 1880 as does that of his great chief. For instance, in 1880 Mr. Flagler swore that "the Standard Oil Company owns and operates its refineries at Cleveland, Ohio, and also a refinery at Bayonne in the state of New Jersey. That at no other place in the United States does the said Standard Oil Company own, operate, or control any refinery or refineries." [127] But in this investigation the following colloquy took place:

Q. When did the Standard Company of Ohio first enter into an alliance with other refineries?

A. If you mean (by) an alliance, Mr. Gowen, I should say never.

Q. I am only endeavouring to aid your friends in getting at what they want. Here, I notice, they propose to prove by you — I will give it in this way — that on account of the disastrous condition of the refining business, the Standard, on October 15, 1874, entered into an alliance with a number of Pittsburg refineries.

A. That is more correctly stated by saying that the Standard Oil Company purchased the refineries owned by the parties in Pittsburg.

Q. Who were they?

A. Lockhart, Frew and Company, I think, was the company. Wait a moment. It was the Standard Oil Company of Pittsburg, it being a corporation, and Warden, Frew and Company, of Philadelphia, and, I should say, Charles Pratt and Company, of New York.

Q, Any others?

A. That is all.

Q. All those gentlemen, Warden, Frew and Company, and the Standard Oil Company of Pittsburg, Charles Pratt and Company, of New York, are now associated with you as parties interested in the present Oil Trust?

A. They are stockholders. The property formerly owned by them was at that time purchased by the Standard Oil Company.

Q. When you speak of purchasing their interest, you do not exclude them from their interest? They united with you and remained as your associates in the business?

A. If it was not from the fact that ours was a corporation, we might call it a copartnership.

Q. They becoming interested in yours, and you in theirs?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you simply used your name to represent the joint ownership, as it was a corporation?

A. Yes, sir. [128]

Table of Contents