Evening star., 1938-05-26
II. Y. A.
Continued From First Page.)

and to discredit the Authoritys pro-
gram and to impugn the integrity OF
his associates before the public"
He said DR.. Arthur Morgan wanted
to hurry the work of the Authority un-
wisely and at one time advocated a
separate coinage for the T. v. A.
DR.. Morgan's unwillingness to CO.
operate in developing unified pro-
gram for T. " A. was responsible for
the coalition between Mr.. Lilienthal
and himself. and not any desire to
freeze out" the then chairman, DR..
Harcourt Morgan declared.
Charge Is Denied.
He also denied fatty Dr. Morgan's
assertion yesterday that he had mis-
handled the fertilizer phase of the
Authority's program.
After Mr.. Lilienthals reappoint-
ment. the witness said, the former
chairman insisted on adoption of a
regulation that no T. v. A. board
action could be taken except by q
unanimous vote.
I'm other words" he said, DIR.
Morgan desired to secure for himself
a veto power"
AS the spare. square jaWed witness
replied to the former chairmans
charges he paused frequently for en-
phasis and glanced at the lO-man in
vestlgating committee. Several COM
mittee members made notes.
ro1otiUc1 lIor ,ror.J @l,,x
one which attended the opening yes
terday was on hand.
Assails Berry Case Handling.
DR.. Morgan devoted his principal
effort yesterday afternoon to the So
called Berry case. assailing Mr.. Lili-
enthal and DR.. Harcourt Morgan for
what he termed their effort to give
something for nothing" to Senator
Berry, Democrat, of Tennessee.
Senator Berry prior to entering the
Senate had acquired, with several as
sociates. the rights to supposed marble
deposits in land to be flooded by Nor
rIs Dam, and when the dam was con-
structed he filed claim for COM
pensation with T " A.
T. Y. A. experts asserted the marble
deposits were worthless, but Mr.. Lili-
enthal and DR.. Harcourt Morgan
sought to have an independent in
vestigation made by outside experts.
This was opposed by the former chair
man on the ground it might lead to
the conclusion the board of directors
recognized some value in the Berry
claims and result in some payment to
him. After protracted discussion the
proposed outside investigation was
dropped.
"WhoIly Indefensible."
Attacking the action OF his asso-
ciates on the ground they knew the
Berry claims We're made in bad faith,
DR.. Morgan told the joint committee:
THE action of the majority of the
board in removing these claims from
the Land Acquisition Division and at
tempting to bring aoout a quiet set
tlement with Maj. Berry and his as
sociates, and especially the lack of
vigorous preparation by the attorney
in charge. were wholly indefensible.
This action did not show frank, dis
interested and honest public service.
1t did not in the least measure up to
proper standards in the conduct Of a
Government enterprise which was
spending millions of public funds.
No explanation or justification for
this course of conduct has been pre-
sented. In the absence of any ade-
quate explanation or justification 1t
must stand as deliberate effort on
the part of the majority of the board
to make things easy for Maj. Berry.
The T. v. A. includes vast projects
of the Government in business. Prop
er administration of such projects
demands vigorous, open and impartial
conduct of that business. There is
no place in such conduct for conces-
sions, confidential agreements or yield