Evening journal., 1916-06-03
RETRACTS CHARGE
AGAINST DUPONTS
Representative Ferris of Ok
lahoma Finds He Was
Mistaken in UtteranceS
PUBLIC CORRECTION
IN HOUSE SESSION

Special to THE EVENING JOURNAL.
WASHINGTON. June 3.-Some
weeks ago during the debate on the
government nitrate plant which was
Incorporated in the army bill Repre-
resentative Ferris of Oklahoma ac-
cused the dupont Powder Company Of
fighting the nitrate plant proposition
and stated that they we're writing let
ters to members of Congress and med
ding in the affair. At that time Rep
resentative Miller of Delaware answer
ed him on the floor of the house in
forming him that he was mistaken and
was making erroneous statements con.
corning the powder company. During
the debate on the naval bill this week
Representative Ferris obtained the
floor for few minutes and read into
the record a statement saying that he
was in error and taking back what he
had said about the DUPONT Company
interfering in the matter.
A good many charges are made
about the DUPONT Company that have
no foundation and the fact that Repre-.
sentative Ferris has retracted what he
said shows that public men are be
in the way of baseless charges. Mr.
Miller's answer to him at the time
was comprehensive. but Mr. Ferris
did not retract what he said until the
other day, when he said:
'Mr. Chairman. ] hope the HOUSE
will indulge me a moment while / di
gress for the purpose of correcting an
erroneous statement that | made while
the so-called nitrate-plant amend
ment was being considered. During
the running debate when the nitrate
plant amendmest was up in the House
| used this language in reply to
speech made by the gentleman iron
Wisconsin (Mr. Lenroot):
am getting letters-so are you
from the dupont Company and
other munitiOn people, urging us
not to adopt a government-owned
plant. AS the gentleman from Wis
consin says, the power people are
here. So they are, and they have
been here for two or three years;
but. on the other side, so are the
DUPONT and munition people here,
too, by letter, if not in person.
THAT was my statement. l hav
letter here from the DUPONT Powde
Company calling attention to m.
statement made in debate, in whicl
they say that they never authorized
anyone to write a letter to then
about this business. and that the!
did not write any letters themselve.
to me on the subject. l have caused
my files to be looked up and finC
that | received only two letters from
the DUPONT people, and they weri
about other matters Independent o
this nitrate plant They we're abou
water power. but we're simply re
quests for copies of the bills ant
hearings before my committee, whicl
were in all things proper. So to tn
extent that l stated that I had re
ceived letters from the dupont Pow
der Company urging us not to adOp
a government-owned plant that state
ment was erroneous, and ! am glaI
to make hasty correction of it. Wha
was in my mind at the time was tha
! had been receiving communication
almost daily from the Bethlehem
Steel Company and other munitioi
concerns presenting their views an
their claims and. their rights as the
appeared to them, and / had cor
fused in my mind the letters frOl
the Bethlehem Company and other
with the two letters that l had re
ceived from the DUPONT Compan
asking me for copies OF bills. hear
ings. and so forth. | do not desir
to take any more time. and I am gla
to make this correction. because
do not want to misquote anyone o
do anyone an injustice"