New-York tribune., 1910-02-27

between the witness al and "a the President. He
said the first withdrawal was mzde on
May 4, 1909. whereas the restoration had
been made early in April.
Mr. Pinchot asked IL he went to the
President in his official capacity as For
ester, replied:
II went to see him as Forester, chair
man of the National Conservation Commits
sion and al his friend. He had told me to
come to him when matters OF this kind
were to be disposed Of
What were the essential facts abou.
these restorations?" asked Mr. Pepper.
THE essential fact of the restoration of
these water power sites was the reversal of
a policy of the greatest importance, which.
il II had not been checked, would nave sub
jected these sites to private appropt 'ation.
Mr. Pepper desired to defer further ex-
animation until the committee had passed
on teh admissibiIity of the conversation
with the President, but was told by Sena-
tor Nelson to proceed with some other phase
of the case.
TAKES ISSUE WITH PRESIDENT.
Mr. Pepper here offered in evidence
copy of the letter written by President
Taft to Secretary Ballinger on September
/: last dismissing the CLAWS charges
against the Secretary and authorizing the
dismissal of CLAWS from the service. His
action led to a dramatic incident, IN which
Mr.. Pinchot took direct issue with the
President
In his letter the President referred to
the fact that it had been charged against
the Secretary that his abrogation of the
agreement with the Forest Service. whereby
the latter should have control OF the forests
oVi-
dence of his unfriendliness to conservation.
Continuing. the President said Secretary
Rallinger abrogated the agreement be-
couse of decision of teh Controller Of
the Treasury, which permitted Of no appeal
and which held that the delegation of
authority from one department TO another
was illegal.
DO you know of any such decision by
the Controller asked Mr. Pepper.
There is no such opinion, to my knowl
edge. No decision by the Controller
which bears upon the point at issue
Senator Sutherland called the attention
of the witness to a decision by the
Controller on September 3. 1908. in which
he held that there was no authority of law
for the detail of an employe from one de-
Iartnent to another
That decision referred wholly to clerical
to do with our work in the field. After
that decision was rendered the agreement
remained in effect, and the Controller con-
tinued to pass teh accounts for our work
l., the field on Indian lands
Are you sure that decision was not rem
dered on the cooperative agreement?
1T was not. It had to do with the pro-
posed detail of a clerk from our office to
the Indian bureau"
DO you know whether or not the de-
cision referred to by Senator Sutherland
was the decision cited by the President -
asked Representative Madison.
L don't know" said Mr. Pinchot. Il
thought he must have referred to some
other decision There is earlier de-
CSion by the Controller June 10, 1907,
which / contend specifically authorizes the
agreement which Mr.. Ballinger dbrogated." :"
The witness explained in some detail as
to how the agreement came to be made.
In the forestry there were trained mn who
were sent to the Indian lands by the De-
partment of the Interior and were paid
cut of the Indian funds. This was done
instead of hiring outside men"
Mr. PinchOt read lorg detailed state
1.'ent OF the work accomplished by the
men of the Forest Service on Indian res
erVatiors.
When he had concluded an adjournment
was taken until Tuesday at 10 a. m.