Mountain advocate., 1916-06-02
.PINCHOT ASKED TO
Define HIS POSITION
Answers Demanded 10 List Of
Pertinent Questions

Clifford Pinchot. former chief forester
and for several years accepted author.
fly ON conservation questions. has been
challenged by the Water Power De,el-
opment Association to define his posi-
ton as to water power legislation and
TO explain to the country why he Is
opposed to pending legislation to en-
courage the development and use of
water powers. In an open letter al
dressed TO the Pennsylvania Bull Moos
or, signed by Harry w. Hand, chair
man of its executive committee. the
Development association, ap, orgnniza-
| ton Of manufacturers Of waller wheels
| and hydraulic and electrical equipment
and supplies, challenges Mr.. Pinchot to
be specific in his charges that certain
bills In congress are In the interests
of water power monopolies and to pro-
! duce proof that there Is, as he has al
legged, n powerful lobby at work In
Washington to pass these bills.
The letter is as follows:
You have charged President Wilson
United States senate with having fail
cd TO defend public rights In permit.
ting the passage Of the Shields bill au-
thorzing water power development on
navigablc streams.
This association holds no brief for
any particular bill and Is anxious only
for legislation that will stimulate new
L .,.ts
through development and use of water
powers now flowing to waste. We be-
lieve the Shields bill TO be such meas
IRE. We believe that 1t offers terms to
| capital which will encourage invest
mcnt In water power development. We
believe that the Endorsement of this
| bill by former Secretary Of War CARR
| son and by the senate committee and
/ the fact that among the senator's who
| voted for Its passage after four weeks
| OF exhaustive debate were representa-
| tlves of the Democratic, Republican
and Progressive parties, while only
| twenty-five votes could be mustered
! against 1t. Is evidence that the bill
| gives full consideration and protection
to all public rights and Interests.
You have written and talked much
| about water power trust. Do not all
students of economic conditions agree
that the power business is natural
monopoly and that there cannot lie
economic competition In the distribu
ton of electric current In any given
locality?
You have complained that the
| Shields bin proposes to give away wa
ter powers without compensation. This,
of course. ignores the big fact that n
large. part Of the expenditures in con-
struction of any dam and power plant
must 20 for improving navigation and
that this public benefit is to be rem
dercd without cost 10 the government.
without raising this argument. how
ever. why do you want n charge made
! by the government for use II water
power:
ave want to see the water powers of
the United states developed and used
DO YOU;
as it not fact that under the Kind
Of restriction and high rentals in the
present laws, approved by you, devel-
oi.n''i' mas come prac'r"',s W s'"iiu
still md no large powers have been or
are l., ing developed In the national for:
es,s ANA 'ne PUBIC uoniaih'
as IT not true that under the present
sherai yam l'"S, winch Il" NOT oher
terms a'.rh''i'' 10 capital Only eieht
uhihS ana wafer power plants win
to'ai ue'eiolmeht Oh less 'Iai ifo'oo
horsepower nave peeh puiit on nav
igapie streams III the last ten years!
is IL hot TACT that III this same
periou "'ter powers III EUROPE nave
nau 'nc Erea'e>. Vt" VI "''e'ol'n'ei''
hhoWi 10 history =.
40 you not know ,hat unuer the re-
S"H wv p'"'eS VI 'he ,n',eu STATES
'or zen years past NOT single electro
'i'hi,'ai pant usihs W"'er power mas
peeh hui' III 'hAs country WINE IN 'nc
same wears Europe mas de'e'orea more
'hhn m''iioh "'rsep'M'r vi hyuro-
'Ie''r''fy ue'"'eo J." nN"''"n OF at'