The independent-reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1909-1955, 1924-01-17


gan, director of the U. S. Geological
Survey in Washington, D. C. is ad-
5ressing a series of letters to the
chairman of the Public Utilities Com
mission on the water power question.
While DR.. Smith Is doing this in his
private capacity as Maine citizen
and taxpayer, his study of the power
kubiect has been in his official posi-
kion as heretofore mentioned, which
boubtless has broadened his views
githout any loss of real interest in
khe welfare of his home folks. Con-
cerning these letters DR.. Smith says;
Some things that I'll say in op-
posing the Baxter policy of non
transmission will seem to favor the
hover companies and I believe in
these public utilities as most essential
hgencies in industrial development
but | wish it understood that by rea-
son of my official position l am barred
Prom having any financial interest in
he development of the mineral re-
sources of the country, the promo
lion of which forms the larger part
bf the work of the United States Geo
logical Survey, and l have given a
ktrjct construction to this statutory
prohibition by including water power
companies. Thus it happens that I
Inn not interested financially in any
water power development in Maine or
Elsewhere. My interest is large,
however, as an actual citizen of the
State. concerned in all that pro-
notes or retards the development of
her industries and general welfare y
In his letter to Hon. Charles e
,urney, chairman of the Public Utili-
hes Commission of Maine, DR.. Smith
writes:
NV dear Chairman Gurney:
Just before the late Governor Park
hurst assumed office ! made an in
formal Arrangement to write him 6
berries OF short open letters on the
water power of Maine, but his un'
kimely death prevented these letters
being written. AS | explained to him
my professional life has been spent II
he service of Federal scientific bu
teau that is investigating the natura
resources of the United States, ant
luring the last Is years my officia
luties have brought me into close
puch with water power development
he country over. But 1t is as {
,tizen of Maine--one of its many
ktizens who are interested in th'
isest use of its resources-that
|sh to address you on this subjec
IL the water power of Maine.
dn n
bll our sources Of energy to strength
In the arm of human labor is becom
ing more and more imperative as We
hevelop our industries. Our civili
Zation Is largely machine-made, ant
the problem of finding how we car
|turn more wheels with the now un
Eharnessed power of our rivers is no
political issue: 1t is distinctly {
business problem. Whatever may
be our political faith we need to ge
together as business men and study
1.-THE practical economics of water
kpower development.
A cardinal point in the presen
water-power policy, as ennunciated by
Maine's Chief Executive, is thai
fMaine's water powers must be KEEP
In Maine for the benefit of Maine peo
&ple and Maine industries2 yet | mus
Suggest that the reasoning back Of
that declaration is open to debate. Ii
fact, 1t is this very question "Wha'
will most benefit Maine people ant
Maine industries?" that / wish tt
discuss with you as a State officia
whose duties lie somewhat close tC
this subject of State control of utili
lies. OF course, l do not overlool
Governor Baxters assertions that thu
monopolization of Names water pow
er for Names use is a principle es
(ablished beyond recall" and that the
policy of non-transmission beyond
The confines of the State" is fixed,
put it Is the teaching of economic
ind political history that no economic
principle is beyond recall unless tha
principle is correct, and that no pub
ic policy Is fixed until it is fixec
light.
The real issue that demands imme
hiate consideration by every citizer
Interested in Names future is how tc
bring about the larger use of the
Energy in the flowing water of Maine's
rivers. The figures published by