Page:The History of the Standard Oil Company Vol 2.djvu/47

 the Patterson case. As it was a case to be decided on purely technical matters—the rules governing elections—no sensation was looked for, but one came immediately. It was a long affidavit from James R. Keene, even more notorious then than now—there were fewer of his kind—for deals and corners and devious stock tricks, declaring that both the Patterson case and this attempt to obtain control were dictated by the "malicious ingenuity" of the Standard for the purpose of destroying the Tidewater and getting hold of its property:

Mr. Keene's putting of the case was undoubtedly correct, but pious horror of commercial brigandage, coming from "Jim" Keene, was useful only to give joy to a cynical world, unencumbered by the possession of stock in either concern. The Keene sensation was followed by a second, an affidavit from John D. Archbold, of the Standard Oil Company, denying that his company had any interest in the present suit, but adding that for some time the officers of the Tidewater had been seeking an alliance with the Standard:

"Byron D. Benson and David McKelvy have at various times for the past years met me at their own instance, and have proposed to combine the business of the Tide-