Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1940-09-15

WENDELL L. WILLKIE.
Star Staff Photo.
to ask the Supreme Court to pass on
the constitutionality of T. V. A. Taking
out the legal verbiage, that's all it was;
and why shouldn't the Government be
interested in determining at the first
opportunity the constitutionality of
T. v. A.? What constitutes the crime
in that? If they had thought anything
was wrong in that, why counsel for the
Alabama Power Co. were all members
OF the American Bar Association and
they could have taken 1t up there"
An even broader phase of the contro-
versy concerns the general charge that
utility corporations, and particularly
holding companies, have been engaged
in wholesale corruption and bribery of
Government. The case of the Union
Electric Co. in ST. Louis, initiated orig
lnally by the Post-Dispatch. is typical,
in the view of the New Dealers, of what
virtually all utility companies have been
up to.
AS the New Dealers see it, COMPANY
executives have offered brides in order
to control State Legislatures and utility
commissions. AS Willkie sees it. the
politicians have had their hands out
everywhere and in elf-defense certain
companies passed out money. He says
that in his own company ne steadfastly
refused to make any deal with the poll
ticians.
The only specific instance that the
New Dealers cite against Willkie con-
Germs Consumers Power. Common
wealth IL Southern subsidiary in Mich
igan Paul H. Todd, former chairman
OF the Michigan Utilities Commission,
offers sworn evidence to show that a
Michigan State Senator, a member of
the Senate Committee on Utilities, re-
ceived about 5000 a month from Con-
sumers' Power at time when he was
active in blocking public ownership bills.
State Senator Paid.
That was lawyer whom we had in
our employ before he was elected to
the State Senate, and everybody knew
ne was the company's lawyer when
elected Willkie said He received a
modest remuneration and that remuner-
alton was continued for some time after
he was in the State Senate.
But let me tell you this. They con-
ducted-The Securities and Exchange
commission, I mean-an investigation
into the Georgia Power Co. similar
to that which has been conducted into
the Union Electric Co. in st. Louis and
they found nothing. They have been
looking everywhere and all they have
found is this one incident in Michigan.
With respect to the payment of money
10 oficials in Missouri. Willkie said:
Yes, and who got that money!" Sure.
IL was the politicians who are support
ing the present crowd in Washington.
They were the ones who got it, 1 cam
not begin to tell you the struggle that
utility executives have had in recent
years with this kind of thing. It's hap
pened In my own company"
Willkie tells how he noticed in the
newspapers during the 1896 CAMPAIGN
that an executive of one of his Southern
companies had made rather substan-
tial personal contribution to the Demo.
cratic National Committee. While not
wanting to dictate the personal lives of
executives of Commonwealth subsidi-
aries. Willkie found an opportunity later
to inform this company president that
he considered such contributions unwise
Later, Willkie says. this same execu-
tive was approached by leading Demo.
crat who asked him to head up the BUSH
ness division of the National Commit.
tee. The executive appealed to Will.
kle, saying he had been told that through
such cooperation it would be possible to
get along with the administration.
New Deal Coercion"
WlllKle answer was no. Later, as
Willkie tells the story, the executive was
appealed to by the highest authorities
to take the position.
In all of this the Republican candi-
date saw deliberate effort to coerce
him into calling off his opposition to
T. v. A. He firmly believes that if he
had been willing to come to terms politi-
cally, it would have been possible to have
made deal with the administration.
The two points in view are funda-
mentally opposed. Willkie sees the poll
tician In the role of villain, while the
New Dealers look upon the utility execu-
tive as the source of evil.
Arguing that Commonwealth e. South
ern reforms-lowered rates for power,
removal Of charges levied. by the hold
ing company on the operating COM
panies-were brought about by T. v. A.
competition. the New Dealers point to
rate comparisons as between Common
wealth companies in the North and Com
monwealth companies in the Tennessee
Valley. The latter, where the T. v. A.
was a factor, have gone down much
more rapidly. Willkie says that such
companies do not truly reflect the facts
because they do not take into account
previous rate conditions. The rates of
Northern companies having been lower
ct the outset
Another point ct issue Il rural cleo