Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:44:55.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Roosevelt's Populism: The Kansas Oil War of 1905 and the Making of Corporate Capitalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2019

Kyle Williams
Kyle Williams*
Affiliation:
Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture University of Virginia
*
*Corresponding author. Email: williams.kyle.edward@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The map of the American petroleum industry shifted rapidly from the Northeast to the Southwest at the turn of the twentieth century when spectacular gushers were struck first in Texas and soon in California, Kansas, and Oklahoma. The flood of small and mid-size oil producers broke the hold that the Standard Oil Company had for decades held on the industry. Competition defeated monopoly. Or so the conventional story goes. This article offers a more complicated narrative by focusing on conflicts between Standard Oil and independent producers in the booming towns of southeast Kansas in 1904 and 1905. In those years, John D. Rockefeller's firm established a monopoly through technologies of distribution and distillation and the production of scientific knowledge and opaque classifications of commodities. Oil producers revolted. A reform movement turned to the rhetoric and policy ideas of Populism as it sought to use state power to challenge the stranglehold of the “octopus.” This article explores the previously unrecognized significance of this movement by showing how the Kansas oil war contributed to the breakup of Standard Oil by the Supreme Court in 1911 and constituted one of the bottom-up sources for the reconstruction of American capitalism.

Keywords

Populismpetroleumcorporate capitalismhistory of capitalism
Type
Essays
Information
The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , January 2020 , pp. 96 - 121
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Historians of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 “Soaking the Octopus,” Emporia Gazette, Apr. 11, 1905.

2 Oil Investigation, file 2809, pt. 2, “That the People May Know.—An Appeal to the People,” Feb. 4, 1905; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2761–2816, box 164; Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Corporations, Record Group 122; National Archives. College Park, College Park, MD.

3 Philip Eastman, “Going Against the Octopus,” Saturday Evening Post, Apr. 8, 1905.

4 For an industry-focused assessment, see Olien, Roger M. and Hinton, Diana Davids, Oil and Ideology: The Cultural Creation of the American Petroleum Industry (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000), 83–117Google Scholar. For a state-level perspective, see Schruben, Francis W., “The Kansas Refinery Law of 1905,” Kansas Historical Quarterly 34 (Autumn 1968): 299–324Google Scholar; and Schruben, , Wea Creek to El Dorado: Oil in Kansas, 1860–1920 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1972)Google Scholar.

5 This should come as no surprise to historians of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. See Rodgers, Daniel T., “In Search of Progressivism,” Reviews in American History 10:4 (Dec. 1982): 113–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a recent discussion of the creation and spread of the “robber baron” epithet, for example, see John, Richard R., “Robber Barons Redux: Antimonopoly Reconsidered,” Enterprise & Society 13:1 (2012): 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Sklar, Martin J., The Corporate Reconstruction of American Capitalism, 1890–1916: The Market, the Law, and Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Sklar, Corporate Reconstruction, 35.

8 Turner, Frederick Jackson, The Significance of the Frontier in American History (New York: Penguin Books, 2008)Google Scholar.

9 See, e.g., Buck, Solon J., The Agrarian Crusade: A Chronicle of the Farmer in Politics (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1920)Google Scholar; Hicks, John Donald, The Populist Revolt: A History of the Farmers’ Alliance and the People's Party (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1931)Google Scholar; Parrington, Vernon L., Main Currents in American Thought: The Beginnings of Critical Realism in America, 1860–1920 (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company, 1954)Google Scholar.

10 Hofstadter, Richard, The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R. (New York: Vintage Books, 1955)Google Scholar, but also Bell, Daniel, The New American Right (New York: Criterion Books, 1955)Google Scholar; Shils, Edward, The Torment of Secrecy: The Background and Consequences of American Security Policies (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1956)Google Scholar.

11 The revisionist (or rerevisionist) school is large. See Nugent, Walter T. K., The Tolerant Populists: Kansas, Populism and Nativism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963)Google Scholar; Pollack, Norman, The Populist Response to Industrial America: Midwestern Populist Thought (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1976)Google Scholar; and, McMath, Robert C., Populist Vanguard: A History of the Southern Farmers’ Alliance (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975)Google Scholar. This historiography sympathetic to Populism culminated with Goodwyn, Lawrence, Democratic Promise: The Populist Moment in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976)Google Scholar and Palmer, Bruce, “Man Over Money”: The Southern Populist Critique of American Capitalism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980)Google Scholar.

12 For a good example, see Jeffrey Ostler's supple analysis of Populist conspiracy theories: Ostler, Jeffrey, “The Rhetoric of Conspiracy and the Formation of Kansas Populism,” Agricultural History 69:1 (1995)Google Scholar.

13 Postel, Charles, The Populist Vision (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

14 For biographical, local, and regional, see, e.g., Barnes, Donna A., The Louisiana Populist Movement, 1881–1900 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2011)Google Scholar; Clanton, O. Gene, A Common Humanity: Kansas Populism and the Battle for Justice and Equality, 1854–1903 (Manhattan, KS: Sunflower University Press, 2004)Google Scholar; Hild, Matthew, Greenbackers, Knights of Labor, and Populists: Farmer-Labor Insurgency in the Late-Nineteenth-Century South (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2010)Google Scholar; Hunt, James Logan, Marion Butler and American Populism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Kazin, Michael, A Godly Hero: The Life of William Jennings Bryan (New York: Anchor Books, 2007)Google Scholar; Ostler, Jeffrey, Prairie Populism: The Fate of Agrarian Radicalism in Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa, 1880–1892 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1993)Google Scholar; Sipress, Joel, “A Narrowing of Vision: Hardy L. Brian and the Fate of Louisiana Populism,” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 7:1 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Ali, Omar H., In the Lion's Mouth: Black Populism in the New South, 1886–1900 (University Press of Mississippi, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Barthelme, Marion Knox, Women in the Texas Populist Movement: Letters to the Southern Mercury (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Cantwell, Gregg, “‘Our Very Pronounced Theory of Equal Rights to All’: Race, Citizenship, and Populism in the South Texas Borderlands,” Journal of American History 100:3 (Dec. 2013)Google Scholar; Creech, Joe, Righteous Indignation: Religion and the Populist Revolution (Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Orr, Brooke Speer, The “People's Joan of Arc”: Mary Elizabeth Lease, Gendered Politics and Populist Party Politics in Gilded-Age America (New York: Peter Lang, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On finance, see Levy, Jonathan, “The Mortgage Worked the Hardest: The Fate of Landed Independence in Nineteenth-Century America” in Zakim, Michael and Kornblith, Gary J., eds., Capitalism Takes Command: The Social Transformation of Nineteenth-Century America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012)Google Scholar; Maggor, Noam, “To Coddle and Caress These Great Capitalists: Eastern Money, Frontier Populism, and the Politics of Market-Making in the American West,” American Historical Review 122:1 (Feb. 1, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 The initial impetus was the rise of the New Right within American politics—self-styled as the Silent Majority. See Brinkley, Alan, Voices of Protest: Huey Long, Father Coughlin, & the Great Depression (New York: Knopf Doubleday, 1982)Google Scholar; Canovan, Margaret, Populism (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981)Google Scholar; Kazin, Michael, The Populist Persuasion: An American History (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998)Google Scholar. Attention has also turned to late twentieth-century movements in Western Europe and Latin America as well as most recently the victory of Brexit and the election of Donald Trump. See Anselmi, Manuel, Populism: An Introduction (New York: Routledge, 2017)Google Scholar; Judis, John B., The Populist Explosion: How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics (New York: Columbia Global Reports, 2016)Google Scholar; Mudde, Cas and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira, Populism: A Very Short Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Some have unfortunately followed in the footsteps of the postwar intellectuals and cast all forms of populism as inherently fascist. See, e.g., Muller, Jan-Werner, What Is Populism? (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Sanders, Elizabeth, Roots of Reform: Farmers, Workers, and the American State, 1877–1917 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999)Google Scholar.

17 Johnston, Robert D., The Radical Middle Class: Populist Democracy and the Question of Capitalism in Progressive Era Portland, Oregon (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Kazin, The Populist Persuasion.

18 Rahman, K. Sabeel, Democracy against Domination (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 3Google Scholar.

19 Williamson, Harold et al. , The American Petroleum Industry: The Age of Energy, 1899–1959 (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1963), 29–37Google Scholar.

20 United States Bureau of Mines, Mineral Resources of the United States, 1913 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1914), 942Google Scholar.

21 Calculations from data of Mineral Resources of the United States, 1913, 938–39.

22 Yergin, Daniel, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power (New York: Free Press, 2009), 79Google Scholar. Chandler fingered new technological development as the engine for this change. See Chandler, Alfred D., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2002), 373Google Scholar.

23 See Pratt, Joseph A., “The Petroleum Industry in Transition: Antitrust and the Decline of Monopoly Control in Oil,” The Journal of Economic History 40:4 (Dec. 1980): 815–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Hahn, Barbara M., Making Tobacco Bright: Creating an American Commodity, 1617–1937 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011), 91–96Google Scholar.

25 Mitchell, Timothy, Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil (Brooklyn, NY: Verso, 2013), 36–39Google Scholar.

26 White, Richard, Railroaded: The Transcontinentals and the Making of Modern America (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2011), 140–78Google Scholar.

27 Letter from F.S. Elliot, Letter to James B. Garfield, Feb. 21, 1905. Oil Investigations, No. 2821. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2817–2826, box 165. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

28 “Kansas Fighting the Trusts,” Public Opinion, Mar. 18, 1905, 400.

29 United States Bureau of Corporations, Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the Petroleum Industry: Part II, Prices and Profits (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1907), 87Google Scholar.

30 Wood, H.L., The Kansas Oil Agitation: Impartial Views of an Accurate Observer who was on the Spot (Oil City, PA: The Oil City Derrick, 1905), 20Google Scholar.

31 Conference with Oil Producers, Apr. 19, 1905. Oil Investigations, No. 2831. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

32 Data calculated from U.S. Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Crude Oil First Purchase Price, Annual,” Dec. 1, 2018.

33 “Letter to the Editor: Overcapitalization of Kansas Oil Companies,” Topeka Daily Capital, Mar. 8, 1905.

34 “A Market for The Oil,” The Sun (Chanute, KS), Feb. 14, 1902.

35 “Kansas Fighting the Trusts,” Public Opinion.

36 Legislature, Kansas, House Journal: Fourteenth Biennial Session (Topeka, KS: State Printing Office, 1905), 564–65Google Scholar.

37 “A National Oil Association Starts,” Topeka Daily Capital, Feb. 9, 1904.

38 “Chanute Oil Producers Association Has Its Organization Perfected and Completed Now,” The Sun, Apr. 19, 1904.

39 “Oil Men Rent Hall,” Chanute Daily Tribune, May 26, 1904.

40 Connelley, William E., “The Kansas Oil Producers Against the Standard Oil Company” in Collections of the Kansas State Historical Society, ed. Martin, George, vol. 9 (Topeka, KS: State Printing Office, 1906), 94Google Scholar. See Schruben, Wea Creek to El Dorado, 77.

41 Forte, Robert Sherman La, Leaders of Reform: Progressive Republicans in Kansas, 1900–1916 (Topeka: University Press of Kansas, 1974), 30Google Scholar.

42 La Forte, Leaders of Reform, 35.

43 Institutions and socioeconomic status distinguished progressive Republicans from People's Party leaders. Clanton, Gene, “Populism, Progressivism, and Equality: The Kansas Paradigm,” Agricultural History 51:3 (Jul. 1, 1977): 567Google Scholar.

44 La Forte defined Hoch's politics as “preprogressive.” La Forte, Leaders of Reform, 2–6.

45 As quoted in La Forte, Leaders of Reform, 41.

46 “Boss Busters Ruled Entire Convention,” Leavenworth Times, Mar. 10, 1904.

47 “About State Matters,” Topeka Daily Capital, Mar. 10, 1904.

48 Legislature, Kansas, Senate and House Journals: Fourteenth Biennial Session (Topeka, KS: State Printer, 1905), 16–17Google Scholar.

49 Connelley, “The Kansas Oil Producers Against the Standard Oil Company,” 94.

50 “Man Who Started Trouble for Standard in Kansas,” Chicago Daily Tribune, Feb. 23, 1905.

51 “Oil Producers of This State to Fight Hard,” Topeka Daily Capital, Jan 13, 1905.

52 “Ringing Resolutions,” Coffeyville Daily Journal, Jan 20, 1905.

53 Order to Stop Work. Oil Investigations, No. 2833. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. National Archives.

54 “Kansas Rises Against the Standard Oil Company,” Current Literature, Apr. 1905, 292–93.

55 House Journal: Fourteenth Biennial Session, 566.

56 “Congress in Oil Fight,” The Hutchinson News, Feb. 15, 1905.

57 “The President Orders an Oil Trust Inquiry,” New York Times, Feb. 16, 1905.

58 Schruben, Wea Creek to El Dorado, 91.

59 “Warning to Standard: 500 Producers Meet,” Topeka Daily Capital, Mar. 19, 1905.

60 “Kansas Fighting the Trusts,” Public Opinion.

61 Interview with Mr. Harry W. Jones, Independence Kansas, May 8, 1905. Oil Investigations, no. 2840, pt. 2. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. National Archives.

62 Independence Daily Reporter (Independence, KS), Feb. 18, 1904.

63 Independence Daily Reporter, Jul. 6, 1904; Chanute Daily Tribune, Oct. 1, 1904.

64 Weekly Republican, (Cherryvale, KS), Dec. 25, 1903.

65 Standard Oil was largely forbidden from doing business in Texas, a legacy of its populist and progressive politics. Instead a number of “independent” oil producers controlled production. See Pratt, “The Petroleum Industry in Transition.”

66 United States Bureau of Corporations, Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the Petroleum Industry: Part II, Prices and Profits (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1907), 87–88Google Scholar.

67 Bureau of Corp., Report Part II, Prices and Profits, 83–85.

68 Digest of Material on Kansas Prepared by Mr. Durand and Mr. Conant for Commissioner's Use, No. 2846, p. 6; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

69 Singerman, David Roth, “Science, Commodities, and Corruption in the Gilded Age,” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 15 (2016): 278–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 Hahn, Making Tobacco Bright, 127.

71 Bureau of Corp., Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the Petroleum Industry: Part I, Position of the Standard Oil Company in the Petroleum Industry (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1907), 254Google Scholar.

72 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 258.

73 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 255.

74 Interview with Mr. A.H. Coffin, Treasurer, Superior Refining Company, Longton, Kansas, May 26, 1905. Oil Investigations, No. 2839. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

75 Independence Daily Reporter, Nov. 5, 1904; “The Petroleum Deposits of Kansas,” The Petroleum Review, June 22, 1907.

76 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part II, 86.

77 Interview with Mr. Harry W. Jones, Independence Kansas, May 8, 1905. Oil Investigations, No. 2840. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

78 United States Bureau of Standards, Circular of the Bureau of Standards No. 154: National Standard Petroleum Oil Tables (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1924), 2Google Scholar; Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 105–106.

79 Temperature could dramatically skew the results, and a series of correction tables for different temperatures were published throughout the 1910s.

80 Bureau of Standards, Circular of the Bureau of Standards No. 16: The Testing of Hydrometers (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1911), 8–10Google Scholar.

81 Bureau of Standards, Circular No. 16, 8.

82 Chanute Daily Tribune, Apr. 14, 1905.

83 Interview with Mr. S.H. Hale, Neodesha, KS., May 31, 1905. Oil Investigations, No. 2838. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

84 Connelley, William, A Standard History of Kansas and Kansans, vol. 4 (Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company, 1918), 1989Google Scholar.

85 Interview with Mr. Wm. C. Haverstick, Independence, KS. Oil Investigations, No. 2840. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

86 Interview with C.L. Bloom, Independence, KS., May 27, 1905. Oil Investigations, no. 2840, pt. 3. Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

87 Constitution of The Kansas Oil Producers’ Association, folder 349, box 39, William Elsey Connelley Collection, Kansas State Historical Society, Department of Archives. Topeka, Kansas.

88 Chanute Tribune, Jan. 16, 1905.

89 William E. Connelley, “The Kansas Oil Producers Against the Standard Oil Company,” 100; “Governor on Oil Trust Bill: Oil Companies Anxious to Do Away With Inspection,” Wichita Daily Eagle, Mar. 28, 1905.

90 Map of Territorial Distribution of Standard Oil Refineries; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2831–2846, box 167. Bureau of Corporations. National Archives.

91 “Principal trunk pipe lines in and from the Appalachian, Lima-Indiana, Illinois, and Mid-Continent oil fields” in Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, facing page 123.

92 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 146–47.

93 Contract Between The Prairie Oil and Gas company and the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway Company, folders #799–807, box 269, Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway Company, Files of the assistant secretary – New York, Contracts #786–#820, 1896–1951, Kansas State Historical Society.

94 Bureau of Mines, Mineral Resources of the United States, 1905, 159.

95 Kansas Board of Railroad Commissioners, “Part V. Directory of Railroads” in Report of the Board of Railroad Commissioners (Topeka, KS: Office of the Board of Railroad Commissioners, 1906), 215–73Google Scholar.

96 William Connelley, The Real Object of the Standard in Blacklisting Kansas Oil, Feb. 1905, folder 349, box 39. William Elsey Connelley Collection. Kansas State Historical Society.

97 D.L. Gallup, Comptroller, Letter to E.D. Kenna, Vice President, Mar. 25, 1905, folder 1, box RR9, Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, New York Executive Department Files, 1–1 Chicago Office, Miscellaneous Correspondence, 1905–1936, Kansas State Historical Society. The comptroller estimated that shareholders on average held about 70 shares.

98 Oil Investigation – Statement of I.N. Knapp, Operator, Chanute, KS; Philadelphia, PA, Nov. 9, 1905, Numerical File 2882, pt. 2; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2868–2888, box 169.

99 William Connelley, The Real Object of the Standard in Blacklisting Kansas Oil, Feb. 1905, folder 349, box 39, William Elsey Connelley Collection, General Correspondence, Standard Oil Fight Records, 1905–1906, Kansas State Historical Society, Department of Archives (Topeka, KS); KOPA letter to Rep. Phillip Campbell (February 15, 1905), folder 349, box 39, William Elsey Connelley Collection, General Correspondence, Standard Oil Fight Records, 1905–1906, Kansas State Historical Society, Department of Archives (Topeka, KS); Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 245.

100 For a different emphasis, see Mitchell, Carbon Democracy, 36–39.

101 Connelley, “The Kansas Oil Producers Against the Standard Oil Company,” 97.

102 See, e.g., Childs, William, The Texas Railroad Commission: Understanding Regulation in America to the Mid-Twentieth Century (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2005), 41–103Google Scholar; Kansas, , Session Laws, 1905, Passed at the Thirty-First Regular Session, The Same Being the Fourteenth Biennial Session (Topeka, KS: State Printing Office, 1905), 526–28, 589–90Google Scholar.

103 Oil Investigation – Kansas Legislation, No. 2874, pt. 1, Maximum Rate Law; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2868–2888, box 169.

104 “Three Oil Bills,” Topeka State Journal, Feb. 1, 1905.

105 Oil Investigation – Kansas Legislation, No. 2874, pt. 1, Pipe-Lines Common Carriers Law; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2868–2888, box 169; Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Corporations, Record Group 122; National Archives. Roosevelt and Garfield entertained the idea of including pipelines as common carriers under the 1906 Hepburn Act, but eventually decided against it for similar reasons.

106 Charles Harger, “Kansas’ Contest with Standard Oil,” Moody's Magazine, Mar. 1906, 427–28; “After the Trust,” Topeka State Journal, Jun. 4, 1907; “Kansas and Rockefeller,” Topeka Daily Capital, Jan. 5, 1908. Standard Oil rejected the very idea of public utility, what William Novak has called a “big, powerful, proliferating” idea at “the very center of American law and political economy between the Civil War and the New Deal.” See Novak, William J., “The Public Utility Idea and the Origins of Modern Business Regulation” in Corporations and American Democracy, eds. Lamoreaux, Naomi R. and Novak, William J (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2017), 142, 161–71Google Scholar. See also Childs, The Texas Railroad Commission.

107 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 289.

108 Oil Investigation, no. 2809, pt. 2, Letter from KOPA to James B. Garfield, Jan. 19, 1906; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2761–2816, box 164; Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Corporations, Record Group 122; National Archives.

109 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 277–78.

110 Compare to the history of Standard Oil of New Jersey. Raechel Lutz, “Crude Conservation: Nature, Pollution, and Technology at Standard Oil's New Jersey Refineries, 1870–2000” (PhD diss., Rutgers University, 2018), 134–62.

111 Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 254–58. For descriptions of the refining process, see Williamson et al., American Petroleum, 112–14; Bureau of Corp., Report: Part I, 254–58.

112 Leatherwood, Nancy Albaugh, “Effects of Populism in Kansas” in Populist Legislation in Kansas (Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1901), 71–83Google Scholar. Topeka Daily Capital, Dec. 18, 1904.

113 Edward Hoch, Message to the House and Senate, Feb. 16, 1905, p. 2; folder 1, box 9, Records of the Governor's Office, Gov. Edward W. Hoch, Correspondence File, 1905–1909, Kansas State Historical Society.

114 Edward Hoch, Message to the House and Senate, Feb. 16, 1905, p. 2; folder 1, box 9, Records of the Governor's Office, Gov. Edward W. Hoch, Correspondence File, 1905–1909, Kansas State Historical Society. Investigation, no. 2809, pt. 2, That the People May Know, Feb. 1905; Numerical File, 1903–14; 2761–2816, box 164. “Publicity” was a term laden with meaning in the early 1900s. From European-influenced “fact-finders” to the Bureau of Corporations under Roosevelt, there were a variety of sophisticated programs that sought to produce public information. See Rodgers, Daniel T., Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 33–159Google Scholar; Sklar, Corporate, 189. See also Johnson, Arthur M., “Theodore Roosevelt and the Bureau of Corporations,” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 45:4 (1959): 571–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

115 Eastman, “The Kansas State Refinery Bill and Its Significance,” The Arena, May 1905.

116 Senate Bill No. 30, folder 347, box 39, William Elsey Connelley Collection, General Correspondence, 1905–1906, Kansas State Historical Society; Topeka Daily Capital, Feb. 16, 1905.

117 Edward Hoch, Message to the House and Senate, Feb. 16, 1905, p. 3; folder 1, box 9, Records of the Governor's Office, Gov. Edward W. Hoch, Correspondence File, 1905–1909, Kansas State Historical Society. Topeka Daily Capital, Feb. 16, 1905. The socialist newspaper Appeal to Reason was not impressed. It called the refinery project an example of “state capitalism.” [Appeal to Reason (Girard, KS), Mar. 11, 1905.] Independence Daily Reporter, Apr. 17, 1905.

118 Arnold, Ralph and Kemnitzer, William J., Petroleum in the United States and Possessions (New York: Harpers, 1931), 457Google Scholar.

119 La Forte, Leaders of Reform, 8.

120 Hoch, a former Populist opponent in the legislature, was representative in this regard. Clanton, O. Gene, A Common Humanity: Kansas Populism and the Battle for Justice and Equality, 1854–1903 (Manhattan, KS: Sunflower University Press, 2004), 185Google Scholar; La Forte, Leaders of Reform, 35–36.

121 They reflected, then, the social grouping of national progressives. For a recent compelling synthesis, see McGerr, Michael, A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2010)Google Scholar. Also Mowry, George, The California Progressives (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1963), 86–104Google Scholar; Lasch, Christopher, The New Radicalism in America, 1889–1963: The Intellectual as a Social Type (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1965), 3–37Google Scholar.

122 La Forte, Leaders of Reform, 6.

123 Olien and Hinton, Oil and Ideology, 55. Ron Chernow called it a “re-enactment” of older events in Pennsylvania: Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. (New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2007), 520Google Scholar.

124 Lloyd, Henry Demarest, Wealth Against Commonwealth (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1894)Google Scholar; Ida M. Tarbell, “Kansas and the Standard Oil Company, pt. 1,” McClure's Magazine, Sept. 1905; “Kansas and the Standard Oil Company, pt. 2,” McClure's Magazine, Oct. 1905; The History of the Standard Oil Company, 2 vols. (New York: Macmillan Company, 1925)Google Scholar.

125 “Roosevelt's ‘Populism,’” Topeka Daily Capital, Nov. 5, 1905.

126 This is a problem far more common in women's and gender history. See, e.g., an exceptional treatment here: Levenstein, Lisa, A Movement Without Marches: African American Women and the Politics of Poverty in Postwar Philadelphia (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

127 Clanton, “Populism, Progressivism, and Equality,” 567–68.

128 Eastman, “Going Against the Octopus.”

129 “Kansas Fighting the Trusts,” Public Opinion. The reference to the John Brown portrait is unclear. There was a plaque in the legislative hall at the time with John Brown's name on it. It was placed alongside the names of other famous Kansas figures. There was also, in another part of the capitol building, an image of Brown in a portrait hall administered by the Kansas Historical Society. The event could have taken place in reference to either. It is likely a journalist conflated the two objects.

130 “Let the Battle Begin,” The Commoner (Lincoln, NE), Feb. 24, 1905.

131 “Easy Victory For Refinery,” Topeka Daily Capital, Feb. 16, 1905.

132 Kansas Legislature, House Journal, 512.

133 Kansas Agitator (Garnett, KS), Mar. 24, 1905

134 Goodwyn, Lawrence, Texas Oil, American Dreams: A Study of the Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association (Austin, TX: Center for American History, 1996), 5Google Scholar. Isser, Steve, Texas Oil and the New Deal: Populist Corruption (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2002)Google Scholar; Oil in Texas: The Gusher Age, 1895–1945 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2002)Google Scholar; Pratt, “The Petroleum Industry in Transition.” See also Olien and Hinton, Oil and Ideology.

135 “Probe in Oil Dispute,” Washington Post, Feb. 16, 1905.

136 “Oil Trust Inquiry,” Washington Post, Mar. 6, 1905; “Standard Oil Inquiry,” Washington Post, Apr. 5, 1905.

137 United States Bureau of Corporations, Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the Petroleum Industry, 3 vols. (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1907)Google Scholar.

138 Murphey, William, “Theodore Roosevelt and the Bureau of Corporation: Executive-Corporate Cooperation and the Advancement of the Regulatory State,” American Nineteenth Century History 14:1 (Mar, 1, 2013), 94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

139 Nevins, Allan, Study in Power: John D. Rockefeller: Industrialist and Philanthropist (New York: Scribner & Sons, 1953), 360Google Scholar.

140 For this quote and a helpful discussion of the changing role of the BOC, see Murphey, “Theodore Roosevelt and the Bureau of Corporation.”

141 William Connelley, Kansas and Standard Oil, ca. 1907, box 44, William Elsey Connelley Collection, Misc. Speeches and Writings by W.E. Connelley, Kansas State Historical Society.

142 Sklar, The Corporate Reconstruction of American Capitalism, 146–52.

143 Corporate liberalism entailed new expectations for corporations that transcended narrow dichotomy of bigness vs. smallness. Livingston, James, Pragmatism, Feminism, and Democracy: Rethinking the Politics of American History (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2001), 54–55Google Scholar.

144 Kolko, , Main Currents in Modern American History (New York: Harper & Row, 1976), 1–33Google Scholar; Kolko, , Triumph of Conservatism (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008)Google Scholar; Sklar, , “Woodrow Wilson and the Political-Economy of Modern United States Liberalism,” Studies on the Left 1, no. 3 (Fall 1960)Google Scholar. Sklar, The Corporate Reconstruction of American Capitalism; Weinstein, The Corporate Ideal in the Liberal State. For an overview, see Hawley, “The Discovery and Study of a ‘Corporate Liberalism.’”

145 Livingston, Pragmatism, Feminism, and Democracy, 35–44.