The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1916-05-12


senator Miles PoindcXtcr 20 Arnold
Reading, az lone. Wash, givea n
clear exposition ot the watcr-power
legislation In congress this winter.
II shows how a powerful lobby has
blocked the proper development OF
power sites for years IN order to
grab off all the federal sites for
themselves without paying Just
compensation for them.
Tho letter follows;
MIR. Arnold Reading.
lone. Washington
Dear Mr.. Reading:
Il have yours OF aist instant
and appreciate exceedingly your
entire frankuess and evident sin.
cerity In writing me your views
on the waterrower question, and
In case. for this or any other
reason. you should oppose me POI
lltically IN my candidacy for re-
election to the senate. | could
not find any fault with you. as IL
Is not only the privilege. but duty
uf citizens 20 act according to
their convictions In these mat.
tiers,
4 suppose you have examined
carefully the several WATERPROOF.
er bills you refer TO and the
questions growing out OF them.
and have arrived at your con
elusion deliberately. so that II
would be useless for me TO argue
IL with you.
Il am sorry I have not left.
out OF my limited allotment.
set of the congressional records
containing the debates on the
subject. as | would like 10 send
them TO you as containing some
what OF an exposition Of my POI
sitlon
FAvoRs FERRIS BILL
you seem 10 be under q mis-
apprehension. however. as 20 my
views In part. at least.
Il notice you deprecate my at
titude towards the waterpower
measures with which I have been
called upon to deal In this ses.
sion Of congress
Further on IN your letter.
take II that your desire Is that
these measures shall be enacted
Into law with the view. OF course.
OF the development OF hydroelcc.
trio plants at feasible sites.
From this | judge that you
favor the attitude OF those who
are for the passage OF these
measures
In view OF that. think IL
proper to state. In the first place.
that | favor the passage OF one
OF the two general water-power
bills now pending In congress.
namely that one commonly called
the Ferris bill. relating 20 water.
power sites on public lands
PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT
Il think II II reasonable
measure and have promoted and
will promote it's passage in any
way ! can.
IT is fact. think. that ~
passed and the necessary rights
incident 10 such development put
upon a definite basis as proyid-
ed In the bill. II would tend TO
promote wzter.pover develop
ment
1T Is vigorously opposed. how
ever. by the water-power promot-
ers and their lobby OF high-ciass
agents. which they have main
tained here for years. 80 that the
latter are the ones who are
blocking the legislation and con-
sequent water-power develop
ment.
For several years there has
been pending a bill with similar
provisions relating to water
powers on navigabie streams.
over which the federal govern
ment has Jurisdiction.
I favor the passage OF this
bill and promoted II in every
way | could. but II also was op-
posed aud blocked by the agents
OF the water-power companies
and their friends In congress.
SHIELDS BILL OBNOXIOUS
In the present congress, how
ever. bill was framed and In.
troduced by Senator Shields. OF
Tennessee. embodying his views
and acceptable TO the water
power representatives.
This bill strips the federal
government OF all control over
the powers developed. even de-
MES Il anything but a nominal
consideration for the sites grant
ed. and cuts off entirely any rev
enue to the government for tins
power developed.
Because I believe. as you say.
that the perpetual control OF the
hydroelectric power OF the coun-
try embraces such a scope Of
importance az to at once en-
brace the life and safety OF the
nation. as well as the CONNER
cial welfare OF no small portion