Document kV5V9ZVLLypEBVKwjJ4JqqLy

January 13* 1970 PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Mr. George D. Clayton, President George D. Clayton & Associates, Inc. 25711 Southfield Road Southfield, Michigan 48075 Dear George: Thanks for your letter of January 9, and for the brochure concerning your organization. There is no doubt in my mind as to the competence of the members of your group whom I know personally and professionally. Their willingness to be in your group speaks well for those of whom I have little or no knowledge. That was not, however, the basis for my inquiry of you, and since I have raised a question within the background of my source of information, I may as well be frank about my uneasiness over your affiliation. I was shocked to find you in the camp of the Bitkin's at Lewistown, Pennsylvania. This may or may not be justified, and I am not one to draw conclusions from superficial appearances. However, my experience in the Noerr vs. Sitkin case, was a most unhappy and disillusioning one. I have never been involved in a more obvious case involving a badly situated, badly operated, and dangerous industrial plant, whose management was seriously at fault, in a legal action, I simply do not understand how the somewhat experienced owners and operators of a secondary lead (among other metals) smelter in the modern world could be either so ignorant or so hard-nosed as to have dealt as they did with the Noerr*s. They were neither reasonable nor wise. They could have settled the matter amicably, and atoned for their fault. It may be, of course* that the local management was, and is, responsible for the situation. (I should state, what you probably know, that I have encountered quite a number of bad secondary smelters. However, most of them, as now found, are run toy small operators, who have sonie excuse, perhaps, for being ignorant and financially weak.) But this plant should have been shut down, until it had the means of controlling the environmental conditions adequately. It is in this context that I see your business affiliation, and it is not (to me) a pleasant outlook for the future of your work, however good it may be. Let me be as unprejudiced as I can, and perhaps with fuller information and time I may alter my view. I realize fully the need for capital in developing your group and its services. I recognize also that the sources of such capital are not numerous, and that one must take advantage of the opportunities that arise. As you know, I have ho objection to direct professional commerce with industrial organizations, since I've been working in such relationships throughout most of my professional life. I have felt the need, however, even so, in having a base in the publicly responsible climate of the University of Cincinnati. Even this has not shielded KiT 0020240 Mr. George D. Clayton Page 2 January 13, 1970 me completely from accusations of bias, but I have not suffered unduly. Unless I am mistaken, however, you are an employee, in the literal sense, of an industrial organization, and, if am not mistaken {which I well may be) one that is a bad actor in the hygienic sense. This, I am afraid will put you at a serious disadvantage in dealing with matters in which the public interest is involved. I write these things, not to be carpingly critical, nor to f i i i d fault with you, for whom 31 have real affection, as well as professional interest, but because our field of professional endeavor is one of the most important in the entire area of the public health. It has had hard sledding because of ^variety of difficulties, not the least of which is the immediate impact upon/industrial economy. In any case, I hope that I am entirely wrong in my reaction to this situation, and I shall be glad, indeed, to change my viewpoint if I am mistaken. I should not be your friend and professional colleague, however, if I were simply to igno:re appearances and hope for the best. With kindest personal regards, Sincerely yours RAK:wp Robert A. Kehoe, M.D. Professor Emeritus of Occupational Medicine i K f 0020241