Evening star., 1938-04-10

Joker" or provision contrary to the public
interest, in contract for the sale of electric
power by T. v. A. to the Arkansas Power e.
Light Co., negotiated under the direction
OF Mr.. Lilienthal. The chairman con-
tended the contract would have permitted
the utility to buy prime power at secondary
power rates." and after his objection to this
clause had been stated the contract was
changed
His next accusation was that his asso-
ciates or one of them. presumably Mr.. Lii
ienthal had made explicitly misleading,
evasive and false reports concerning the
T. v. A. to the President and to Congress"
This was followed by the following refer
ence to his associates:
Inere Is practice Of evasion, intrigue
and sharp strategy with remarkable skill
and malevolent habit Of avoiding direct re-
sponsibility which makes Machiavelh seem
open and candid. 1t took me a wear or
more of close association to be convinced
that the attitude of boyish, open candor
and man-to-nlan directness was a mask
Tor hard-boiled, selfish integrity"
HIS next accusation concerned a T. v A.
contract with the Aluminium Co. of Amer
lea, concerning which he said Il feel that
the relations of the T. " A. to the Alumi-
mum co. have failed to protect the public
interest have protested to the board (of
l. " A) repeatedly on this matter"
Ihe final charge by Chairman Morgan
was That the situation within T. v. A. was
not due primarily to differences on power
policy nor to mere family quarrel, but that
the real difficulty was to secure honesty in
government" Citing the Berry case in
point, ne added: In my opinion. good
government and the welfare of the T. VA
demand that the situation be cleaned up
ana that standards Of openness, fairness
and honesty shall prevail"
In taking up the counter charges of tn.
other directors. made public through the
White House, the President stated they did
not involve the personal integrity of
Chairman Morgan.
These charges by DR.. H. A. Morgan and
Mr.. Lilienthal." the President said, do not
necessarily reflect on the personal integrity
OF Chairman Morgan. but they do reflect on
his Willingness to cooperate in decisions
reached by the board in the manner pre-
scr!bed by law
Full Details Promised.
Dr.. Harcourt Morgan and Mr.. Lilienthal
went into some detail in support of their
charges. They were not denied by Chair
man Morgan except in a general way in
one or two instances. He said, however
he would f,,t1
congressional hearing. The charges against
the chairman may be summarized as fol-
lows:
l. 1t was not permissible for the chair
man in public statements to attack the per-
sonal motives, good faith and integrity of
his associates
2. 1t was not permissible for the chair
man as an expression of disagreement to
engage in unsupported attacks upon the
integrity, professional ethics and compe-
tence Of key members of the T. v. A. staff,
and to harass and interfere with them
while they were carrying out duties result
ing from decisions duly arrived at by
majority of the board. This charge re-
lated to the chairman's criticism Of T. v.
A. counsel for the manner in which he
handled suits (won by T. v. A. against
the power agency.
3. That it was not permissible for DR..
Morgan Ito collaborate with former chief
engineer for the insult Utility System in
the preparation of detailed recommended
ton on power pooling policy, which re-
| port proposed evasions and violations of
the T. v. A. Act; nor was is permissible,
during the negotiations, for him to permit
such report to be made available to the
| utilities"
4. 1t was not permissible for the chair
| man, after board action had been duly
taken. to fail and refuse to carry out an
| explicit action directed by the board. This
concerned the failure to send q telegram
as voted by the majority Of the directors.
5. That the chairman was determined to
! "rule OF ruin" the T. VA.