RISE OF THE STANDARD OIL COMPANY 187 



line and produced 95 per cent of the refined oil of the country, 

 was an informal substitute for the modern trust. The bond 

 of unity was common ownership of stock in the various com- 

 panies of the " alliance" and personal agreement between the 

 officers of the respective companies and the officers of the 

 Standard Oil company. The Standard alliance included 

 the Standard Oil company of Cleveland, the Standard com- 

 pany of Pittsburg, the Acme Oil company of New York (lo- 

 cated at Titusville), the Imperial Oil company at Oil City, the 

 Atlantic Refining company of Philadelphia, the Camden 

 company of Maryland, Charles Pratt & Co. of New York, 

 J. A. Bostwick & Co., Sone & Fleming Manufacturing com- 

 pany, Warden, Frew & Co. of Philadelphia, and the Balti- 

 more United Oil company of Baltimore. 



In 18S1 the Standard Oil company of Ohio, the nucleus of 

 the Standard "alliance," was a corporation capitalized at 

 $3,500,000. Since the formation of the "alliance" it had 

 maintained connections with its allies by a union, not of cor- 

 porations, but of stockholders. "Then," as the solicitor of 

 the Standard Oil company explains, "for convenience of con- 

 trol and management the Standard Oil trust was formed. It 

 was simply an agreement, placing all the stock of these vari- 

 ous companies in the hands of trustees, declaring the terms on 

 which they were held, and providing for the issuance of a 

 certificate showing the amount of each owner's interest in the 

 stock so held in trust. This agreement did not in any essen- 

 tial manner change the character of the association previously 

 existing. Its essential character was simply a common owner- 

 ship of stock in various corporations. If they had so preferred, 

 the owners of these several associated companies could have 

 organized — in the state of New Y r ork, for example — with any 

 capitalization desired. Each could then have lawfully com- 

 bined with all the other companies, forming one corporation to 

 transact business wherever desired. But it seemed preferable, 

 instead of organizing one corporation in New York, to organ- 

 ize a corporation in each state where business was being car- 

 ried on, so that the business transacted in each state might 

 be conducted by a home corporation, subject in all respects to 

 the law of the state where located. Accordingly, we organ- 



