This witness could name only one refinery out of the score of independent concerns once flourishing in Pittsburg, which was not under its control.[108]
"Dismantled," was the monotonous refrain of many of his answers to the questions as to what had been done with the refineries thus got under control. Asked why these works had been thus dismantled or shut down, he explained it variously as due to unfavorable location or worn-out machinery or some such disadvantage.
If these works were so badly situated and so illy fitted for the business and so old, why did it purchase them? "Can you give good commercial reasons why it would buy all unprofitable junk?" he was asked.[109]
"I cannot give any reason why they bought the works," was the helpless answer.
From the beginning to the end the language used by the founders of the combination proves scarcity to have been their object. "There is a large number of refineries in the country—a great deal larger than is required for the manufacture of the oil produced in the country, or for the wants of the consumers in Europe and America," said one of the principal members in 1872.[110]
This is almost identical with the language used in 1880 in the effort to enjoin Cleveland refiners who "threatened to distil."
In 1887 we will see the same power putting its hand and seal to an agreement to enforce the doctrine that there was too much oil in the earth.
In 1872 there were more refineries than were needed for the oil; in 1887 there was too much oil. The progression is significant. And down to the present pool with the Scotch refiners we will see the same men enforcing abroad, year by year, the same gospel of want.[111]
"The producers in America are quite alive to the wisdom of not producing too much paraffine, and are already adopting measures to restrict it," said the chairman at the annual meeting of one of the principal Scotch companies.[112]