The Washington times., 1921-08-29

scrutiny put before the Pubic.
The important thing, however, is
that the other side shall also get fully
before the public. AS all the big
water-power interests oppose the grant
to Ford, and also the nitrate interests,
there will be no lack of publicity on
that side.
Pinchot Makes a Point.
1T is said that certain Wall street
magnates who hate Mr.. Ford are anx-
ious that his offer should be rejected.
What these men think about Mr.. Ford
and his offer is surely no reason for
giving him public property of enor-
nous value for a consideration wholly
inadequate and on terms utterly I'M
fair to the public"
Assuredly not. But the hostility
of those men makes a square deal
in publicity very difficult. Also 1t
makes it probable that If the Ford
offer is rejected another offer will
be quickly and secretly accepted.
without the public's knowing any
thing about the terms in advance.
Mr.. Pinchot is one of the most
upright and devoted men in the
United States. but every human be-
ing is affected to some extent by his
environment. However. 1 am sure
that IL the Ford offer is thrown out
by the War Department "a step which
would be highly satisfactory to the
War Department. Mr.. Pinchot will
use his nationwide influence to look
sharply into any substitute offer
II he has the opportunity.
What l fear is that IL the depart
ment gets the Ford offer success
one of the offers of the regular
water.power people with very little
advance publicity.
Mr.. Pinchot is not in favor OF re-
jecting the Ford offer. He says:
Il do not believe that Mr.. Ford s
offer should be summarily rejected.
believe that it should be changed.
Should BE No Difficulty.
First, TO make it fit the Roose.
welt water power conservation pol.
icy, now the law of the land.
Second, to make it pay for the
property of the people something
approaching what that property is
really worth; and,
Third, to make what 1t offers to
the farmers clear beyond doubt"
On the first and third points there
ought to be no difficulty. On the
second point, Mr.. Pinchot proceeds
on what seems to me an erroneous
premise. He bases his conception
OF the value of the property largely
on what the Government has spent
on it.
In my humble opinion that is a
minor consideration. Suppose Mr..
Lasker tried to get rid of the prop
crty no longer desired by the Ship
ping Board on the basis of what the
Government had paid for il. what
reality would there be in that?
The Government has no intention
Whatever of operating the plant at
Muscle Shoals. Also il is going 10
be operated. That Mr.. Ford should
be held to what Mr.. Pinchot (per.
maps rather needlessly) calls the
roosevelt water power policy tal.
though 1t did not become law under
Mr.. RoosevelO, l cordially agree.
Also II there is any real doubt about
the meaning of what Mr.. Ford offers
TO the farmers, by all means let Mr..
Pinchot himself rewrite the clause.
Root OF the Dislike.
But l submit that the widespread
drive against the Ford offer does have
a meaning, and a meaning working
in the opposite direction from MIR. Pin.
Chots very high testimony.
The intensity of opposition to Ford's
getting to work at Muscle Shoals is
exactly similar in origin to the reams
of talk now being printed to show that
Ford's railroad experiment involves no
censure of existing railroad standards
of efficiency.
Go back and read the Stanley re-
port and you will find Andrew Car.
negie testifying 10 the effect that the
Steel Trust bought him out SO that
IT would not have to meet his high
standard in competition. 1t had,
through mere size, enough money TO
be able to throw away many millions
to get rid Of a fellow as annoyingly
efficient as Andy.
And that is also the root of the dis.
like entertained by our financial kings