Mr. O'BRIEN. What would you say is the Alaska Committee for Public Power?

Mr. MACKLE. It is sir-I was told by the president of the CAPA Board in Homer that it consisted of 10 or 12 very public-spirited citizens who were so enthused over the possibilities of the development of the power in the Territory that they wanted to do everything that they could. They told me it consisted of men of the stature of certain individuals whose names I think might not need be put into the record now.

Gentlemen, you know that honest men who are behind something are not ashamed to have their names disclosed. No one is if it is an honest purpose.

Mr. ABBOTT. If this may be framed in my view: It is peculiarly a local problem which at this time would seem to be in such a posture that what we call our democratic processes could do much to preclude repetition in the future of what has happened in the past. If it took, as it turned out, a friendly atmosphere and hearing for a little soulcleansing, then perhaps that has been accomplished. But, as with Congressmen, the short answer where people have a vote, if those in elected positions or selected positions demonstrate either irresponsibility, forgetfulness or casual treatment of those things which guide them, the motto as applied by some to Congressmen is "Throw the rascals out."

Mr. MACKLE. Good spirit.

Mr. O'BRIEN. You mean applied to the local situation?

Mr. MACKLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. O'BRIEN. Thank you. I don't want to get carried away. Mr. MACKLE. In our opinion, to summarize the action of the board, whether it had been well attended, it has the effect and force of a misappropriation of funds and is nothing more than a conspiracy to defraud the consumers. I realize it is our, problem and would not have come here had certain items been represented to you yesterday which, as I said before, might have been acted upon in deliberation at other levels and at consequent periods.

You were also given certain comments yesterday about a local newspaper. Let me correct your record and let me say, if I never said another thing in Anchorage, thank God for the Anchorage Times. And I say that not with discredit to the other paper, but because the Times had been discredited by a gentleman who is our legal counsel and not permitted to make such a statement because such is not the policy of the CEA Board.

Prior to you gentlemen coming here and the rest of your committee, we authorized the counsel for the CEA to appear and speak on matters of right-of-way and nothing else. So what was said yesterday was not the feeling of the seven or eight thousand consumers.

Mr. ABBOTT. Out of fairness to the witness you refer to and a fellow lawyer, I believe he qualified his statement all the way through that these were personal views and were his observations. Now I believe the record reflects that. I don't believe he pretended to speak on behalf of CEA or CAPA. I am confident the record reflects that. Mr. MACKLE. I would agree with you, sir, as a man of legal mind, but it has that import, effect, when one is here in a definite capacity— what he says carries the connotation with it.

Mr. O'BRIEN. May I ask you this: Do you believe this committee has gone as far as it can or should in this matter, in other words, in bringing out the testimony and letting it stand for itself, with the solution, if any is required, in your hands locally?

Mr. MACKLE. It would be in our hands.

Mr. O'BRIEN. You do not believe that any further action on our part is necessary?

Mr. MACKLE. I do not; no, sir, because I am unaware of the powers of the committee.

Mr. O'BRIEN. I have always been one to believe that the committee has great powers, but I believe they should be used sparingly, and there has been too much throwing of weight around by some.committees of Congress in the past.

Mr. ABBOTT. And if I may add, Mr. Mackle, there are obvious steps that might be taken by this group using, if you will, a power that may be inherent in it. There is a Federal question involved here.

On the record it appears that—and I add, needlessly, perhapsbecause of the Federal investment in Eklutna, and because REA's are in essence Federal investments, they have the private repayment responsibility that the city of Anchorage has with respect to Eklutna. But to tinker and tamper and pry into the operations of an association or corporation, it does not occur to me is the business of a congressional committee-to frame the facts only up to that point where the Federal interest has been delineated and why the concern of the committee. Perhaps that has been delineated. It seemed unnecessary certainly on its face in the District of Columbia, but the closer one came to Anchorage it became apparent that it was indeed not unnecessary but necessary that some forum be found. It happened that it was this committee as the forum.

If you do not have and I am confident you do because I have met many of them-people who, whether because of legal qualifications or because of long experience with the powers of outraged members of associations or corporations-there are remedies undoubtedly inherent in your articles of incorporation or association and your bylaws, and consideration was given to calling in the directors of CAPA one by one to find out what they knew.

It occurs to me as an individual please understand I am speaking perhaps as a lawyer and certainly not as counsel to the committeethat several avenues of approach, all of them leading to the same destination, are indicated. But I believe, and Mr. O'Brien's continual instruction and attitude and conduct of meetings has been to not abuse the powers which a congressional committee does have.

Mr. MACKLE. I do not believe that you have, and, as I said before, we are more than grateful that you went into something that was really our problem. We spent all summer trying to unearth it. The reason that we were unable to is that we accepted the statement of the president of the CAPA Board that there were 10 or 12 outstanding and responsible businessmen who constituted the Alaska Committee for Public Power, and I, for one, did not want to do anything that would upset something that we must have. Nor did I want to subject to embarrassment by reason of the misconduct of others responsible men who had connected themselves with such a movement. One must be careful in what they do. But today we are militant and, as I say, because you had been given certain statements yesterday we felt it was proper to come before you.

I do not know the consequences of what you heard yesterday. When I heard Mr. Abbott ask one witness if he realized the consequences or his possible subjection to the National Lobby Registration Act, I was fearful you might apply the doctrine of agency and carry it right on down to Chugach Electric.

Mr. ABBOTT. Please understand-it occurs to me and there is no implication at all that there is a violation. That is a rather broadly drawn act and implies in many respects prohibition against failure to identify oneself only when specific legislation is pending. You advise your people of the existence of that act and anyone would be well advised to know of its existence. On its face, I think registration in this case would not have had to be made, but I am simply saying people who sponsor visitors to Washington would be made well aware of it. It has a very lofty purpose. It serves a useful purpose.

I think Mr. O'Brien has stated what must surely be the majority opinion of Congress as to the value of lobbies, if you will, and you will find among those lobbyists, properly so, some of the best informed, best educated, most skilled people in the world, paid to present the views of those they represent.

Frequently it is argued that the Department of Justice of the United States has many, many attorneys representing the United States, and the view of Justice may not always coincide with people in private industry. In such things as antimonopoly actions someone who is not officially connected with any governmental subdivision or governmental level must represent industry. So there should not be, and I trust there is not, any implication in other than this that people would be well advised to know of the existence of the act, which violation promises rather severe consequences.

Mr. MACKLE. Bear in mind we hold no-bret-against the recipients of the money. To us they are of no consequence. They are just as good as we are. I know one of them personally and I do not believe that he is to blame or to be castigated by us. Our censure is against those with whom we are in constant communication for their failure to apprise us of the fact and be honest with us when we requested suspicion (?) which were aroused by their real conduct.

That would conclude my remarks, and for your attention I thank both of you.

Mr. SEISER. Mr. Chairman, I had one short matter which I thought might add value to this question.

Early this year, during the Territorial legislature while it was in session, Captain Riddell called on me. I had heard of the gentleman but never knew him before.

Mr. ABBOTT. This was in the spring of 1955?

Mr. SEISER. Yes. He approached me knowing that I was director of Chugach Electric and my conjecture was to solicit support and possibly funds to send a delegation to the legislature in behalf of a memorial to Congress concerning the acquisition of Eklutna. One of the things that he discussed was the proposition that they could obtain it at 50 percent.

At the time I had quite a discussion with him on it and at least I gave him the impression that I thought it was just illogical, because he never pursued the subject further with me. But I thought it might be of value to know that that question had arisen at that time.

Whether he approached any of the other members I don't know. He used the phrase "I think we need to send somebody down." I

don't know who he meant by "we." He did not identify himself with any particular

Mr. GUSTAFSON TOoup at that time. That is all I have to say.

Mr. GUSTAFSON. I was to cover some points Mr. Mackle or Mr. Seiser did not cover, but I say Mr. Mackle covered everything very amply.

I would like to congratulate the committee on finding out exactly where that mysterious $15,000 came from.

Mr. ABBOTT. It must have been a surprise to learn that it came from you and your people.

Mr. GUSTAFSON. I am sure it was.

Mr. ABBOTT. You really were seeking to find out where it went? Mr. GUSTAFSON. Yes. Well, we left no stone unturned to find out where it did come from and, as you know, we were unsuccessful in that attempt.

One more point I would like to make.

Mr. Boyko's statements were qualified yesterday, but I just want to point out our so-called battle with the city pertaining to paralleling lines and so on is not an insurmountable obstacle.

Now we may have been a minority on this board, but I suspect we are in the majority or will be very shortly, that we think that this conflict is not unsoluble, and I believe we can solve that here at our own local level without any help from the committee.

Mr. O'BRIEN. Thank you very much, gentlemen.

Mr. ABBOTT. One observation. If this sprinkler system compares with most, it is probably set at 160° and I believe it just survived a severe test.

I might add, also, when Mr. Phillips appeared yesterday and made some comments on the activities of the Alaska Visitors' Bureau, I had seen a brochure on the Territory of Alaska which referred to the grandeur of its mountains, the beauty of its lakes and snow, the wildlife so readily to be seen, and added almost needlessly that it was a land of surprises. You can delete the mountains and the lakes and the snow, but please leave in future brochures the reference to surprises.

Mr. MACKLE. I wish you would stay in Alaska, Mr. Abbott.

Mr. ABBOTT. You know if I don't arrive in Nevada on time I may have to.

Mr. MACKLE. I wish you a happy marriage, if I may.

Mr. Boyko. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I might make a brief comment to correct the record and take no more than 1 minute, and please stop me if I do.

Mr. O'BRIEN. In all fairness, I think that is proper.

Mr. BOYкo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to make it very clear, without comment on what has just been said, which will stand on its own merit, that neither Mr. Mackle nor Mr. Seiser nor Mr. Gustafson, who are still three minority members of the board of directors of Chugach Electric, have any authority to speak for that organization here today, and I am sure that they will readily admit that although they have neglected to say so.

I think my own position with respect to the so-called mystery fund or mystery committee was made amply clear yesterday and the record will speak for itself on that.

It is a pity that this testimony here was given today at the tail end of the hearing, so to speak, so that it will probably remain in the record unchallenged;

I do agree that Messrs. Mackle, Gustafson, and Seiser do not present in any sense any point of view which is conflicting to that of the city of Anchorage. The three gentlemen are on record at the present time in favor of a proposal which would sell to the city of Anchorage all of the properties of the cooperative within the city at the original cost to the cooperative without any guaranty of boundaries for any time in the face of future annexations or future additional requests by the city, and which undoubtedly, if carried through, would destroy Chugach Electric Association and the rural electrification program in the Territory of Alaska.

Now

Mr. ABBOTT. Well, of course, at that point, Mr. Boyko, that is undoubtedly within your perspective. That again, it occurs to me, Mr. Chairman, is a matter between those people within the association.

May I add, I did not understand from any of these witnesses that they claimed to represent the views of the association which they served. In fact, they have made it painfully clear that those views are not apparently representative.

Mr. BOYKO. Right. I do not necessarily disagree with all the criticism, Mr. Chairman, that was made of some of the activities of the so-called Committee for Public Power in Alaska. In fact, as a private citizen, and more strongly as the volunteer counsel of Central Alaska Power Association, I have expressed some of that criticism before. However, I do feel that this committee should have in its record some information at least, scanty as it may be, of the record position of these three gentlemen so that their protestations or-in this hearing here today.

I thank you for your courtesy.

Mr. ABBOTT. May I observe at this point, it is standard committee practice to leave the record open, with a reservation in the committee chairman and his ranking minority and majority members to decide whether or not material submitted-and I believe we have rather arbitrarily set October 15 as a cutoff date for sending to Washington additional statements. But certainly reserving the right to decide whether or not they are germane or whether or not they have any relevancy to that which they purportedly relate.

Mr. O'BRIEN. That is correct. But may I suggest that before you take advantage of that opening with voluminous documents, that the chairman at least would not like to overburden the record with this particular controversy, important as it may be to those involved, because our prime purpose in coming to Alaska was to try to find out what your problems were and do something about them if we could, and I would not care particularly to present to our full committee and to the Congress a record in which the tail was so much bigger than the kite. So if you would use restraint in these additional letters or communications that you would send, the Chair would appreciate it for that reason, because the overall good of Alaska is still the aim of this committee.

Mr. GUSTAFSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out Mr. Boyko's statements were not entirely correct or complete at that point, and I believe the revealing of the matter at our board meetings will bear me out.

Mr. O'BRIEN. I am sure there will be clarification as the fall turns into winter and winter into spring, and fortunately for the committee we will be out of the fire.