Evening star., 1932-07-24
WATERWAY FIGHT
WARNS CAMPAIGN
New York "PoWer Authority
and Administration Head.
. ing for Set-to.
BY WILLIAM HARD.


The st. Lawrence River promises to
roll itself into one of the fiercest fights
Of the presidential campaign.
The power authority" of the State
of New York brings numerous serious
charges against the Hoover administra-
tion in the matter of the negotiation
and conclusion of the st. Lawrence
seaway treaty All flve members of the
power authority of the State Of New
York are appointees of Gov. Franklin
D. Roosevelt. Gov. Roosevelt gives his
backing to the charges brought by
them. unanimously. against the White
House and the Department of State.
The quarrel, therefore, Is really directly
between Gov. Roosevelt and President
Hoover-which is to say, between the
two major candidates for the preSi-
dency in the Fall election.
This is the second Of their two main
quarrels SO far. The first was. and is,
regarding relief by the Federal Gov
ernment in the matter of the depres-
sion. Gov Roosevelt at Chicago differ
entiated himself from President Hoover
on relief" more deeply than on any
other topic in either Of the two party
platforms. He maintained that relief"
by the Federal Government should be
bigger and better. He specified re
forestration" as his first suggested
method of bigger and better relief"
He is expected to specify additional
methods as the campaign progresses.
Trivialities on Service.
Close now upon the heels Of "relief"
as Rooseveltian campaign issue comes
the ST. Lawrence.
The surface is filled with a sand
storm of trivialities The underneath
of it is occupied by strong difference
in temperament Gov. Roosevelt tends
toward experimentation with the public
ownership and operation Of electric
power President Hoover tends away
from it. That is the difference in
temperament, in principle, as under
stood by the two men themselves.
Ironically, in practice, the difference
Is not so marked.
The Democratic platform. adopted
at Chicago. under the overwhelming
immediate influence of Gov. Roosevelt
and his friends. is destitute of any COM
power public ownership operation
idea. The closest approach to it is in
the entirely non -committal words:
we advocate the conservation. de-
yelopment, and use of the Nations
water power in the public interest"
The public interest" might mean
public ownership and operation. but 1t
might, contrariwise, mean only public
regulation.
On the other hand, the record Of
President Hoover at Boulder Dam. now
Hoover Dam, in the Colorado River, is
tinged with publc-ownership-and-
being built by the Federal Gov
ernment. The power plant at the
dam will be operated by pri-
vate company and by public instru-
mentality (the city of Los Angeles
Jointly. The power from the power
plant will go largely directly to two
agencies publicly owned and operated:
Namely, the power and light depart
ment of the city of Los Angeles and
the metropolitan water district OF Los
Angeles and neighboring municipalities
Accusations and Replies.
IN practice, accordingly, the two can
didates are more separated by logic as
talked than by life as lived. The accu-
sationS brought in the controversy
against President Hoover by the friends
of Gov Roosevelt-and the replies pro-
duced by President Hoover's friends
are as follows:
l. President Hoover refused to see
Gov Roosevelt for conversation re-
garding New York's interest in the St
Lawrence development. President
Hoovers friends reply that at least a
dozen other States were equally en-
Enthusiastically in the St. Lawrence de-
velopment and that the President ne
gotiated the terms of the development
treaty without special pressures from
the Governors of any Of them. The
President saw no reason, his friends
say, for giving unique preference to
the Governor of New York.
2. In August Of last year Mr.. William
r. Castle, jr., Undersecretary OF State,
Informed Gov. Roosevelt that no nego-
tiations with Canada regarding the st.
Lawrence were under way whereas in
this month Of this year President Hoo
yer informed Gov. Roosevelt that nego-
tiations with Canada regarding the St.
Lawrence had been under way for three
years Why this discrepancy?
The Presidents friends answer that
both President Hoover and Undersecre-
tary Castle were right. Published pub
lie documents prove that diplomatic
notes between the United States and
Canada began getting exchanged as far
back as 1927-which is five years ago.
Nevertheless, at the moment when I'm
dersecretary Castle wrote his letter to
Gov. Roosevelt. this exchange Of diplo-
matte notes had temporarily ceased.
The impartial commentator might say
that President Hoover's statement to
Gov Roosevelt was wholly, basically
accurate, but that Undersecretary Cas-
ties statement should have been: I'VE
used to have bananas We presently
shall again have bananas. I only wish
to say to you that we have no bananas
today"
Adequate Consultation Disputed.
3. In the course of the negotiations
with Canada the State Department did