The Waterbury Democrat., 1943-10-26

SALARY FOR FISCAL YEARS
 NAME Nov. 90. 1941 Nov. 30, 1942 F. E. Bradley. $2l0, ,603.06 $1o9, ,659.25 F. s. O'Reilly 2l0,60SO6 1eo66O.26 J. E. Owsley 421, ,206.11 299, ,498.S7 o. c. Swibelius 63l, ,809.l6 4g0, ,i48.ll E, B. Swibelius 210,60306 199, ,659.25 G. Swibelius 2l0,603.06 190,650.25 c. R. Willis. 210,6o3.06 199,650.25 FIVE TOOK CUTS
 The Treasury Departments list of individuals receiving from corpora tions compensation for personal service of over $75,000 year, just made public, shows that the Dix well Corporation had seven exec cutlves, each of whom received $2oo,oo0 or more for the past two years, as follows:
 Here you have Q total of over @ million paid in salaries to seven men in l94l and nearly SIS million in 1942. Five of the seven took cuts of a mere $i1,000 8 year in 1922 though Owsley took Q hack of. $122,- 900 and o. c. Swibelius one of $l32,o00.
 If you never before heard of the Dixwell Corporation or any of its seven top-flight salaried men, that is understandable, for the Dixwell Corporation doesn't make anything itself. It is simply holding com pany, giving engineering manage ment services to the High Standard Corporation and the Higr Standard Manufacturing Company. These two firms hold the war contracts and make the machine guns.
 On the fact of 1t, this may look like another war proflteering case, but a second look reveals an entirely different story. Both the High Standard Corporation and the High Standard Manufacturing Company have had their books examined by the War Department Price Adjust ment Board.
 The result of the renegotiation Is that the High Standard companies will receive for the machine guns they make only $22,4l7,0O0, instead of the original contract price of $46, $500 The saving to the tax payers in this case Is $24, ,233, 900. EFFICIENT OPERATORS
 Tn spite of this tremendous re- turn to the public treasury, Brig Gen. Albert J. Browning of the pur- chasing division of Army Service Forces, emprasizes that the High Standard companies are being per- mited to retain high profitS-higher profits than some of the other com. panies making machine guns-for the reason that the High Standard companies are more efficient opera tors.
 Whereas the average price of ma chine guns from other manufactur- CTS hase been between $330 and $500 per gun, the High Standard price has been $250 per gun, and even at that figure they make and are per- mitted to retain higher profit.
 The case of the Dixwell Corpora ton, which has furnished the en- gineering brains and management experience permitting Its High Standard subsidiaries to make this excellent productino record, is stjA in the process of renegotiation. Tn this case, there is nice distinction. Under the renegotiation law, the government Price Adjustment Boards may not take into considera- ton what any company does with it's earnings, or what salaries 1t may pay it's executives, so long as those salaries are not a cost of produc- tion. The seven $200, ,000-a-year men of the Dixwell Corporation received no compensations for their services to the High Standard companies. The question is whether the fees charged by Dixwell for engineering services to High Standard, permit ting them to make their good record, were excessive,