Norwich bulletin., 1916-04-18
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
An Iniuuitous Bill.

Mr. Editor: The Ubiquitous Shields
bill, giving away the waterpowers on
our navigable streams, about which I
wrote The Bulletin Feb. Is, has been
driven through the senate, but it has
not passed the house. There is still a
good chance not only to stop this raid
on public property, but to pass a fair
and honest waterpower bill in its
place.
Everything I said about the Shields
bill in my letter to The Bulletin was
confirmed in the debate. According
to it's own supporters, this bill turns
over to the power interests waterpower
equivalent to twice the mechanical
power of every kind now used in the
United States, or enough to meet the
needs of two hundred million people.
This it does in perpetuity, although
pretending to limit the grant to fifty
years. Small wonder there is pres
sure to get it through.
On March 81 a substitute for the
Shields bill was reported to the
house Of representative. Unlike the
Shields bill, this house bill makes no
perpetual grant of public waterpower,
but wisely and in fact sets a limit OF
fifty years. Nevertheless, it is not yet
a good bill For example it gives
away the public waterpowers without
compensation. There is no reason why
the waterpower corporations should
not pay for what they get. The rest
of us do. The house bill should be
amended accordingly.
If the house corrects its own bill
and then passes it, the good bill from
the house and the bad bill from the
senate will go to conference, and the
differences will be adjusted by the
conferees. The managers of the wa
terpower campaign believe that a ma
jority of the conferees will be friend
ly to them, and will report a bill in
their interest. They will then try to
,~L, rs ,rrl, !,
ably in the confused and crowded fl
nal hours of the session. Such a plan
has often served the special interests
in the past, and it is dangerous now.
During the debate on the Shields
bill, this course was openly advised.
| There was under discussion an amend
ment giving preference to the appli-
cant for a public waterpower who Of
| fers the best terms to the public. One
| Of the supporters of the Shields bill,
Senator Nelson of Minnesota, after re-
| ferring to the amendment as bad and
| vicious" went on to say: TT is some
| thing that we can eliminate in con-
| ference. We might let it go
in and then dispose of it in confer
ence" Congressional Record, March
We can beat this plan only by let
ting the people understand the facts
] This the power interests have set out
| to prevent by confusing the public
| mind with interested statements and
personal attacks.
| 7 am asking for The Bulletins help
| once more to get the house to pass
| a good bill, and then to stand by it
no matter what the conferees may
do. If the house stands firm, the peo-
pie will win this fight. But the house
needs. to know that the people are
| behind it.
Let me call your attention again tc
the Ferris bill, a good bill dealing
with waterpower on public lands and
national forests, which has twice
passed the house. An undesirable SUBJ
stitute, the Myers bill, now before the
senate. gives the public waterpowers
away in perpetuity. Under it, the
power interests could occupy and ex-
| plot the Grand CANYON itself, the
greatest natural wonder on this con-
tinent.
The waterpower interests wan
everything or nothing. In the las
eight ears they have killed eight wa.
terpower development bills that were
| fair both to the corporations and Il
the public. What the people need i:
I waterpower development on equitable
terms without further delay. They
can have what they want by letting
the house know it.
Sincerely yours,
CLIFFORD PINCHOT.
| Milford, Pa, April 10, 1916.