The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-02-12
DENBY AND OIL RESERVES


 DENBY AND OIL RESERVES | Although the resignation of Secretary Denby from the navy department is in doubt, yet there are many who be- lieve that it should occur for the good of the country. There is no proof and doubtless no accusation of any guilt or corruption on the part of Mir. Denby, but his name and his official record are under a cloud of suspicion, while there is no manner of doubt that his incapac- ity to perform his full duty is revealed by his weak surrender of a vital naval resource.
 It cannot be said in MT. Denby's de- fense that he was the unwilling tool of the private effort to gain control of an invaluable oil concession. MT. Denby, according to the testimony before the senate committee, went deliberately and directly counter to the advice and earn est solicitation of all the naval experts. For example, while both MT. Fall and Mir. Denby declared that they made the transfer to save the government from the loss of all the oil by leakage, yet Mir. Heald, chief of the oil and gas sec ton of the United States Geological Sur vey, testified on October 29: "I have made an estimate of the drainage, but I did not carry it out to the ultimate refinement, because it became apparent that the drainage would not be serious" !" Commando H. A. Stuart of the navy en- gineers two days later testified that he had disapproved the transfer of the oil reserves to the interior department and l that he knew of no other officer in the navy who did approve, nor of any oc- casion why the transfer should have been made. Admiral Robison, commander of the Engineers, said that he favored the transfer, but his testimony later showed that the source of his, informa- tion as to the alleged leakage at Teapot Dome was no other than Edward L. Doheny, himself, in person!
 That the. technical and engineering of- ficers in the navy, which is the depart ment of MT. Denby, were unalterably and vigorously opposed to the transfer of this property to the department of the interior, thence to private control and exploitation, is indicated in letter dated July 8, 1921, written by MT. Fall l to, Mir. Doheny, which stated: There will be nospossibility of any future con- flict with navy officials and this depart ment, as have notified Secretary Denby that I shall conduct the matter of naval leases, under the direction of the presi- dent, without calling any of his force into consultation unless conferred with him personally upon matter of policy" This is internal evidence that the off cers of the navy not only disapproved the leasing of these priceless reserves, but that they used all the means at their command to oppose it, with the result that the secretary of the interior, with out protest from the secretary of the navy, cut them out of the picture!
 And although MT. Denby disclaimed technical knowledge and said that he was leaving such details to the experts, him. self looking only for results, yet it is of record, through his own testimony and that of others, that he rejected and re- pudiated his experts of the navy, and accepted instead the information and ad- vice given by the experts of the oil in- terests. He. not only himself did not in- quire into the details of this momentous transaction, but he scorned and humili- ated the patriotic and able men of his own expert staff, who sought to point out to him the danger of the surrender of the reserves, and the fallacy of the argument on which the surrender was based. MT. Denby admitted that he was incapable of handling the reserves in an informed manner, and gives the im- pression that he sought to remedy that by cutting his responsibilities down to fit his capacities, instead of withdrawing and giving opportunity for the appoint ment of a successor of adequate capacity. -
 ALABAMA'S MUTUAL TIES As time passes the various sections of Alabama are being knit into closer