Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 40, Number 8, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 October 1907 — BIG OIL TRUST PROFITS. [ARTICLE]

BIG OIL TRUST PROFITS.

New York Hrarlng Show* Profit of •/9490,315,034 In Seven Year*. The hearing before Special Federal Referee Ferriss of Missouri in the government suit to dissolve the great oil combination was begun at New York, with Attorney—Frank-B. Kellogg representing the government and John G. Milbum and others as counsel for the Standard Oil Company. Mr. Kellogg submitted in evidence statistics compiled by the Standard Oil officials, showing that the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey had earned profits in the last seven years aggregating $100,315,034,7 and that during the •me time dividend? had been paid to the amount of $308,339,403. These profits came from the plants owned by the parent company, as well as from those of the subsidiaries., controlled by it. This was the first time in the history of the oil trust that a record of its earnings entire had been made public. Acting Controller Fay of the Standard said there were nineteen subsidiary companies, and gave "theft names. The evidence is being taken for use in the Circuit Court at St. Louis, where the dissolution Suit, under the anti-trust law, is to be*fm>secuted. Mr. Kellogg, among other things, wanted the company to produce the minutes of the various meetings- at which the absorption of smaller companies was arranged, but the counsel for the company was inclined to resist. The examination of Charles M. Pratt, secretary of the trust, brought out the ,fact that the parent company bad transferred its $4,000,000 holdings in the Waters-Pieree Oil Company of Texas to a son-in-law of Vice President Archbold from 1904 to 1907, during the ouster proceedings brought against the subsidiary by the State of Texas* and that only $125,000 dn cash was paid for the stocks, the remainder being in the form of a note ■which was never fully taken up, tho profits of the Waters-Pierce company going toward the payment of the note. Mr. Pratt admitted that this transaction did not appear on the books of the Standard, the accounts being kept under the title, “C. M. Pratt Investment.” Mr. Pratt explained that by this arrangement he held ‘the stocks for the trust merely as a convenience, and when asked if it was not done to avoid the anti-trust laws of Texas he replied, “Not that I know of.” Tabulations were also verified, showing enormous earnings of subsidiaries, among which those of the Standard Oil Coigpany of Indiana appeared ost remarkable. This corporation on a capitalization of $1,000,000 made profits in 190(i amounting to $10,510,082, and last year paid to the parent company $4,495,500. This amounted for at least one year to the remarkable profit of 1,000 per cent. Mr. Kellogg also brought out evidence showing how the New York branch had been systematically drained by saddling upon It enormous liabilities at the same time that its assets were greatly increased. Counsel Milburn disclosed one line of defense by giving notice that the trust would object to any testimony bearing upon acts committed prior to July 2, 1890, when the Sherman law went into effect.